Egyptian Christians Boycott Talks With Clinton Claiming U.S. Favors Islamists

Ahram and Digital Journal both report that in Egypt, representatives of the Coptic Orthodox Church as well as representatives of Egypt's Evangelical Church refused an invitation to meet with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton yesterday. A number of Christian politicians also declined to meet with her.  They all believe that the United States favors Islamist parties over secular and liberal forces and is interfering in internal Egyptian affairs. A U.S. spokesman, however, said that Clinton "wanted, in very, very clear terms, particularly with the Christian group this morning, to dispel that notion and to make clear that only Egyptians can choose their leaders, that we have not supported any candidate, any party, and we will not."

Haiti's New Constutition Eliminates Prior Protection For Voodoo Practitioners

As reported by Reuters last month, on June 19 Haiti's President Michel Joseph Martelly finally published the amended version of the country's Constitution that that had been approved by Haiti's Parliament in May 2011.  The delay was caused by disputes over whether the version originally sent to the President for publication was accurate. Haiti reverted to its 1987 Constitution while a correct version was being created.  The publication last month puts the new amendments into effect. The most widely publicized amendments relate to dual citizenship, a new electoral council and greater independence for the judiciary.  However Haiti Libre reported last week that a less-publicized amendment may have the effect of reducing protections for practitioners of voodoo.  A 1935 Haitian law-- Decree-Law of 5 September 1935 on superstitious beliefs-- outlawed ceremonies and rituals involving offerings to "alleged deities," making believe by occult means that it is possible to cure individuals or change their wealth, and possessing cabalistic objects used to exploit the public's gullibility or naivety. Section 297 of Haiti's 1987 Constitution repealed this Decree-Law, along with certain others that were seen as "arbitrarily limiting the basic rights and freedoms of citizens." The new constitutional amendments that took effect last month in turn abrogate Section 297 of the 1987 Constitution. Priestess Euvonie Auguste, Head of the National Confederation of voodoo in Haiti, says that now vodoo practitioners will need to use their own means to protect themselves from any attacks.

UPDATE: A government spokesman says that voodoo practitioners' concerns are misplaced. He says that a 2003 Presidential decree recognized voodoo as a religion, and that the 1935 decree was never promulgated and thus never became law. (Haiti Libre 7/23/12).

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Moamen Gouda and Sang-Min Park, Religious Loyalty and Acceptance of Corruption, (January 29, 2012).
• Zvi H. Triger, Freedom from Religion in Israel: Civil Marriage and Non-Marital Cohabitation of Israeli Jews Go to the Rabbinical Court, (Israel Studies Review, 2013).
• Munir Ahmad Mughal, Judicial Education and Training: Importance in Islam, (July 8, 2012).
• Konstantinos Tsitselikis, Aspects of Legal Communitarianism in Greece: between Millet and Citizenship, (Oñati Socio-Legal Series, Forthcoming).
• Richard F. Storrow, Religion, Feminism and Abortion: The Regulation of Assisted Reproduction in Two Catholic Countries, (Rutgers Law Journal, Vol. 42, No. 3, 2011).

From SmartCILP and elsewhere

• Michale P. Mosher and Ryan K. Oberly, A Gift Not So Simple-- Tax Issues Associated With 'Love Offerings', Taxation of Exempts, July/Aug. 2012, pg. 28.
• Margaret F. Brinig and Nicole Stelle Garnett, Catholic Schools and Broken Windows, 9 Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 347-367 (2012).
• Marie A. Failinger, Finding a Voice of Challenge: The State Responds to Religious Women and Their Communities, 21 Southern California Review of Law & Social Justice 137-206 (2012).
• A Survey of Religious Freedom for Individuals and Faith-Based Institutions. Articles by Erik W. Stanley, Michael Stokes Paulsen, Wesley J. Campbell, Stanley W. Carlson-Thies and Francis J. Manion. 24 Regent University Law Review 237-402 (2011-2012).
• Citizenship and Civility in a Divided Democracy: Political, Religious, and Legal Concerns. Introduction by Mark L. Jones; articles by Eugene Garver, David Lyons, Jeremy Waldron, Marianne Constable, Steven D. Smith and Jack L. Sammons; response by David P. Gushee. 63 Mercer Law Review 793-913 (2012).

Wisconsin High Court In Fragmented Decision Dismisses Fired Church Employee's Breach of Contract Claim

DeBruin v. St. Patrick Congregation, (WI Sup. Ct., July 12, 2012), is a suit by a Catholic Church's former Director of Faith Formation against the parish claiming that she was fired from her position in breach of her contract with the congregation. The case was certified by the state court of appeals to the Wisconsin Supreme Court.  The case generated 4 separate opinions, with 5 of the 7 Supreme Court justices agreeing with the trial court that plaintiff's suit should be dismissed.  Justice Roggensack, in an opinion joined by 2 other justices, held that permitting the claim to proceed would unconstitutionally interfere with the Church's choice of ministerial employees.

Justice Crooks and Justice Prosser each wrote a concurring opinion taking the position that the court should decide the case on contract, rather than constitutional, grounds (though Justice Prosser discussed the constitutional issues at some length). Justice Crooks held that no contract exists because the contract provision plaintiff sought to enforce amounted to an illusory promise.  Plaintiff could be terminated only for good an sufficient cause, but the determination of what is sufficient cause was left by the contract solely to the employer's determination.  Justice Prosser concluded that a contract exists, but that the Church "reserved its rights to terminate its ministerial employees on grounds of 'dissatisfaction,' and it exercised those rights." Second-guessing the parish's decision would involve the court in an internal parish conflict and would be inconsistent "with any reasonable view of religious liberty."

Finally, Justice Bradley (joined by Chief Justice Abrahamson) dissented, holding that the common law contract claims at issue do not implicate free exercise concerns, and that it premature on the record before the court to determine whether the claims would foster excessive state entanglement with religion.  Among the issues on which the various justices disagree is the extent to which the the U.S. Supreme Court's 2012 Hosanna-Tabor decision on the ministerial exception doctrine (see prior posting) should be seen as barring common law breach of contract suits by ministerial employees.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Guillory v. Ellis, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94619 (ND NY, July 9, 2012) a New York federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94618, March 22, 2012) and held that factual disputes prevent the granting of summary judgment in favor of a Jewish inmate who complained about two incidents: on one date, due to confusion regarding the call-out list he was not permitted to attend religious services and on another date religious services for Purim were cut short.

In Farrell v. Ercole, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95595 (SD NY, July 10, 2012), a New York federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 155,633, Dec. 8, 2011) and denied the habeas corpus petition of an inmate whose convictions grew out of several armed robberies. Among petitioner's complaints was the trial court's denial of his request for an adjournment of his trial on a Friday afternoon so he could return to Rikers Island before sundown to observe the Jewish Sabbath.

In Morales v. Putnam, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96327 (MD PA, July 11, 2012), a Pennsylvania federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95906, June 7, 2012) and dismissed, for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, the complaint of an inmate who adhered to the Taino Indian religion that he was required to shave and get a hair cut after his transfer to an out-of-state prison. He says his religious grooming exemption should have prevented his being placed on the out of state prison transfer list.

City's Ban on Fortune Telling Violates 1st Amendment

In Adams v. City of Alexandria, (WD LA, July 11, 2012), a Louisiana federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97042, June 20, 2012) and entered a declaratory judgment that a city's ban on "palmistry, card reading, astrology, fortune-telling, [and] phrenology" violates the First Amendment.  Plaintiff is a tarot card reader who reads fortunes in exchange for voluntary donations. The magistrate rejected the city's argument that the ordinance merely regulates commercial speech. Applying strict scrutiny to the ordinance, the magistrate said:

Based on its own clairvoyance, the City has decreed in brief that it is impossible to predict the future, and contends the business of fortune-telling is a fraud and is inherently deceptive....  The City suggests that "fortune-tellers have no demonstrable facts upon which to base their predictions."... The danger of the government deciding what is true and not true, real and unreal, should be obvious. For example, some might say that a belief in God or in a particular religion, for example, or in the "Book of Revelations" is not supported by demonstrable facts. Books that repeat the predictions of Nostradamus and the daily newspaper horoscope could be banned under the City's reasoning.

In adopting the magistrate's recommendations, the federal district judge added one comment--  as a supplement to a footnote in the magistrate's opinion. The footnote had said that Tarot cards are a set of 22 pictorial playing cards. The court added:

tarot cards come in many forms, some dating back centuries.... Tarot decks are often 78 card decks, consisting of face cards (sometimes called Major Arcana) and number cards.... It is usually the 22 face cards that are used in fortune telling. We note also with interest that the "art" of fortune telling proliferates in front of St. Louis Cathedral, in the City of New Orleans, apparently without incident.

Delaware High Court Rejects Wife's Claim That Alimony Computation Infringed Her Free Exercise Rights

In Wright v. Wright, (DE Sup. Ct., July 10, 2012), the Delaware Supreme Court rejected a claim that the state's Family Court violated the free exercise clauses of the Delaware and federal constitutions in the way it computed a wife's ability to pay alimony. In reviewing her monthly expenses, the Family Court reduced her monthly charitable contributions from $1000 to $100, finding that to be a "more reasonable amount."  The $1000 represented the wife's tithing to her church, and she claimed that the alimony award prevents her from paying the obligatory 10% required by her religious beliefs. However, the Supreme Court held: "The Family Court found that even after the alimony payments, the Wife still has a surplus of $1,402—more than enough to pay for the remaining $900 for tithing should the Wife so choose."

Court Temporarily Enjoins Philadelphia's Ban On Food Program In Parks

Yesterday, a Pennsylvania federal district judge issued a temporary injunction against enforcement of Philadelphia's new ordinance that bans public feeding of groups of more than 3 people in any city park.  The ordinance is part of the city's efforts to close down an established program by Philadelphia churches to feed the homeless in city parks, and move the food program to indoor facilities.  As an interim measure, the program would be moved to an area outside city hall. (See prior posting.) According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, yesterday's ruling in Chosen 300 Ministries, Inc. v. City of Philadelphia, (ED PA, July 12, 2012), did not focus on the constitutional objections that had been raised by plaintiffs, but instead on the fact that there had been little evidence that the City Hall site was preferable. In his ruling from the bench-- to be followed by a formal written opinion-- Judge William H. Yohn, Jr. said:

It seems to me that . . . the parks provide more dignity than the concrete apron outside City Hall. It doesn't strike me that City Hall is an acceptable option.

Judge Yohn said he was inclined to leave the temporary injunction in place for a year to give the city and homeless advocates time to work out an alternative arrangement.

Critical Reaction To German Ban on Ritual Circumcision of Boys Continues

Jewish Journal reported yesterday that rabbis from around Europe have held a 3-day meeting in Berlin to plan how to combat the ruling from a court in the city of Cologne last month banning ritual circumcision of young boys. (See prior posting.)  They plan further talks with Muslims and Christians who also see the ruling as a more general threat to religious freedom. Pinchas Goldschmidt, the chief rabbi of Moscow who organized the meeting, urged the German Jewish community to continue to perform circumcisions without waiting for a change in the law. The head of the German Medical Association, who has urged doctors to refrain from performing circumcisions until the legal situation is clarified, says that there is a risk that now increased numbers of non-medically trained persons will perform circumcisions. This could lead to medical complications.

This week Jewish and Muslim leaders also met with members of the German and the European  Parliament seeking legislation to stop the ban from spreading beyond the area affected by the Cologne court's decision.  Rabbi Goldschmidt said that the ban threatens the existence of Germany's Jewish community and is another example of creeping prejudice in European law against non-Christians. Germany's opposition Green Party promised to seek legislation to protect religious rights of Jews and Muslims.  Meanwhile, British Chief  Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks wrote a powerful denunciation of the German court's action, saying in part:

It is hard to think of a more appalling decision. Did the court know that circumcision is the most ancient ritual in the history of Judaism, dating back almost four thousand years to the days of Abraham? ... Did it know that banning milah [circumcision] was the route chosen by two of the worst enemies the Jewish people ever had, the Seleucid ruler Antiochus IV and the Roman emperor Hadrian, both of whom set out to extinguish not only Jews but also Judaism?.... If it did not [know this], then how was it competent to assess the claim of religious liberty? If it did, then there are judges in Germany quite willing to say to religious Jews, in effect, "If you don’t like it, leave." Do judges in Cologne today really not know what happened the last time Germany went down that road?

[Thanks to Eric Rassbach via Religionlaw for the lead on Lord Sack's comments.]

UPDATE: BBC News reports (7/13) that a spokesman for German Chancellor Angela Merkel said: "Circumcision carried out in a responsible manner must be possible without punishment..... For everyone in the government it is absolutely clear that we want to have Jewish and Muslim religious life in Germany." He added that the government would look urgently at ways to create "legal certainty."

Shiite Cleric Convicted of Blasphemy In Indonesia

In Indonesia yesterday, a court in Sampang district has sentenced Shiite Muslim cleric Tajul Muluk to two years in prison for "blasphemy causing public anxiety."  AFP reports that Muluk was arrested in April during anti-Shiite riots  on the island of Madura. Witnesses told the court that Muluk taught that the Qur'an is not an authentic text, that Muslims should pray only three times a day, and that the hajj pilgrimage is not obligatory. Human Rights Watch, calling for the government to drop all charges against Muluk, says that the Shiite community in Sampang's Nangkernang village has been under attack by Shiites since 2006 when 40 Sunni clerics and four police officers signed a public statement, declaring that the Shiite sect is heretical.  Human Rights Watch also decried the role of Bakor Pakem (the Coordinating Board for Monitoring Mystical Beliefs in Society) in prosecutions under Indonesian law. A part of the public prosecution office, Bakor Pakem is charged with "oversight in respect of religious beliefs that could endanger society and the state."

6th Circuit: Rehabilitation Act Non-Discrimination Provisions Apply To Religious Organizations Delivering Social Services

The federal Rehabilitation Act, Sec. 504 (29 USC 794(a)), prohibits any program receiving federal financial assistance from discriminating on the basis of disability. As defined in Sec. 794(b)(3), the ban covers an entire organization, even if the part of the organization that discriminated does not receive federal funds, where the organization "is principally engaged in the business of providing education, health care, housing, social services, or parks and recreation." Otherwise the ban applies only to the part of the organization that receives funding.  In Doe v. Salvation Army in the United States, (6th Cir., July 11, 2012), the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court's grant of summary judgment to defendant finding that questions of fact remain as to whether the Salvation Army principally engages in the business of providing social services. The court said:

nothing in the statute distinguishes between social services done for worship or spiritual reasons and social services done for secular reasons. If the statute had expressly excluded “religious organizations” or entities engaging in “religious services,” we would be faced with the difficult task of deciding whether § 504 applies to a religious organization that defined its religious service as the practice of social service. Under the current language of the statute, however, the Salvation Army is no different from any other church or religious organization that chooses to engage in one of the statutorily designated activities.

The court also rejected the Salvation Army's broader claim that religious organizations are totally exempt from Sec. 504.  The Salvation Army relied primarily on language in a 1987 Senate Report on amendments to the law.  The court however emphasized that Congress did not include any express exemption from Sec. 504 for religious organizations.  This stands in contrast to various religious exemptions that are included in other federal non-discrimination laws. [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

Criminal Mistreatment Conviction of Faith-Healing Father Upheld

In State of Oregon v. Worthington, (OR App., July 11, 2012), an Oregon appellate court upheld the conviction of a member of the Followers of Christ Church for second degree criminal mistreatment in the death of his 15-month old daughter. Because of his religious belief in faith healing, defendant did not seek medical attention for his daughter who died of bacterial pneumonia and a blood infection associated with a large cystic mass that compromised her body's immune defenses. The court rejected defendant's argument that because of the state constitution's free exercise protections, he could be convicted only if the state established that he knew his conduct would bring about his daughter's death. Causing death is not an element of the criminal mistreatment charge. Defendant was acquitted by the jury on the separate manslaughter charge.  His wife was acquitted on both manslaughter and mistreatment charges. (See prior related posting.)

Residence For Sikh Priests Entitled To Tax Exemption

In Dasmesh Darbar Sikh Temple v. Marion County Assessor, (OR Tax Ct., July 11, 2012), the Oregon Tax Court, Magistrate Division, held that a house provided as a residence for a Sikh temple's three priests is entitled to a tax exemption. The county had determined that the house was a residence whose use was a mere convenience. State law requires that, for the residence to qualify for an exemption, clergy living there must be a requirement of church doctrine or a practical necessity.  The court concluded that this requirement was met because the priests are "carrying on the 500 year old tradition of living close to or in the temple to 'protect the scriptures (Guru Granth Sahib)'".

Agreement Reached For Language On Role of Shariah In Egypt's New Constitution

Egyptian Independent reported yesterday that drafters have reached an agreement on the language for Egypt's new constitution regarding the place of Islam and the role of Islamic law. The committee of Egypt's Constituent Assembly charged with drafting constitutional provisions on the basic components of the state is proposing the following as Articles 1 and 2 of the new Constitution:

1. The Arab Republic of Egypt is democratic, consultative, constitutional, and modernized; based on separation of powers and principal of citizenship, it is part of the Arabic and Islamic nation and tied to the African continent.

2. Islam is the religion of the state, and Arabic is its official language, and the principles of Islamic Sharia are the main source for legislation. Christians and Jews shall resort to legislation derived from their own religions.

"Principles of Islamic Sharia" will be interpreted by Al-Azhar. (See prior related posting.)

In Face of Lawsuit, County Willing To Remove 10 Commandments, But Sponsor Refuses

As previously reported, in May the American Atheists filed a lawsuit in federal district court in Florida challenging a 5-foot high granite Ten Commandments monument that had been erected in the courtyard of the Bradford County, Florida Courthouse. Now News4Jax reports that in order to avoid a costly legal battle, the county has directed the Community Men's Fellowship, the group that sponsored the monument, to remove it. However the group has refused. Responding to the county's formal notice, the group wrote last month: "We have prayerfully considered your request and have determined that we will not comply with the County's order." [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Court Applies New York "Get" Law In Muslim Divorce

In Majdeh M. v. Jamshid A., (Kings Co. NY Sup. Ct., July 4, 2012), a New York trial court applied New York's "Get" Law, Domestic Relations Law Sec. 236 [B] [5] [h] (originally enacted to deal with Jewish divorce issues), to an action involving maintenance and equitable distribution awards in a Muslim divorce. The court held:

In the case at bar, the wife testified that she is a Muslim and if she does not obtain a religious divorce she will be unable to remarry. Although she will be divorced in accordance with secular law, she will not be considered a single woman within her religious community. She further testified that in the event she were to travel to Iran that her husband, or then ex-husband, could withhold his permission for her to leave Iran. The court credits the wife's testimony that she made arrangements for the parties to meet at a local mosque to address the religious divorce but that the husband simply did not respond.... 

The credible testimony by the wife leads this court to find that the husband's refusal to give the wife a religious divorce, thereby removing barriers to her remarriage, is a basis to exercise its discretion under Domestic Relations Law 236 [B] [5] [h] to disproportionately distribute marital assets. The husband shall have 45 days from the date of this decision to take any necessary steps to remove any barriers to the wife's remarriage. In the event that the husband fails to comply, he shall forfeit the maintenance and equitable distribution award made herein and repay to the wife the $4,000.00 cash advance heretofore discussed.

The court also held that the parties' mehrieh (dowry agreement), while not enforceable in a matrimonial action, can be enforced as a separate contract claim. It rejected the husband's contention that the mehrieh is merely a religious document.

U.S. Again Protests Iran's Imprisonment of Christian Pastor

On Monday, the U.S. State Department again issued a statement protesting Iran's continued imprisonment of Christian pastor Youcef Nadarkhani who, it says, still faces the threat of execution for simply following his faith. Monday marked the 1000th day of Nardkhani's imprisonment. CNN, which reports that Nardkhanis' next court hearing is scheduled for Sept. 8, explains the background:

Nadarkhani, born to Muslim parents..., converted to Christianity when he was 19. Later he was ordained as a minister and led a network of house churches in Iran. He was arrested in October 2009 after he lodged a protest with local education officials after learning his child was being forced to read from the Quran.... He was charged with apostasy and convicted in a provincial court -- which sentenced him to death. He appealed.... The case made its way to the Supreme Court, which said Nadarkhani's sentence could be overturned if he recanted. The 34-year-old pastor has refused.

(See prior related posting.)

Vatican's Battle With China Over Unapproved Ordinations Continues

The Vatican yesterday issued a communique (full text) stating that Rev. Joseph Yue Fusheng, who was ordained in China's Heilongjiang Province on July 6 as a bishop, without Vatican approval, has automatically incurred the sanction of excommunication as provided by Code of Canon Law, Canon 1382. It says he now lacks the authority to govern the priests and the Catholic community in the Province. The statement went on: "The Bishops who took part in the illicit episcopal ordination and have exposed themselves to the sanctions laid down by the law of the Church, must give an account to the Holy See of their participation in that religious ceremony."  Catholic World News, reporting on these developments, notes that the Vatican statement also applauded the July 6 ordination of Bishop Thaddeus Ma Daqin as an auxiliary of the Shanghai diocese with the approval of both the Vatican and the Chinese government.  However apparently Bishop Ma has now been taken into custody by Chinese officials after he announced during his ordination ceremony that he was quitting the government-backed Patriotic Association. [Thanks to Alliance Alert for the lead.]

Religious Rights Organization Changes Its Name

The group Alliance Defense Fund, an important litigant in religious liberty cases, announced yesterday that it is changing its name to "Alliance Defending Freedom," with a tag line "For Faith. For Justice." The change was explained as one intended to help people more easily understand the group's work and why it matters. An FAQ page describes ADF as: "an alliance-building legal ministry encouraging Christians to come together to ... protect and defend the religious freedom that was bestowed upon us by God and secured in the U.S. Constitution."

Amended Complaint OK'd In Establishment Clause Challenge To Funding of Children's Home

In the long running litigation in Pedreira v. Kentucky Baptist Homes for Children, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93754 (WD KY, July 6, 2012), a Kentucky federal district court has overruled objections by Kentucky Baptist Home for Children (KBHC) and permitted plaintiffs to file a second amended complaint as state taxpayers challenging on Establishment Clause grounds the payment of state funds to KBHC for the care of children. The court held that the allegations in the amended complaint that the hiring practices and employment policy of KBHC are "evidence of" an Establishment Clause violation are permissible even though the district and appeals court previously held that the firing of plaintiff because she is a lesbian was not itself an Establishment Clause violation.

Ohio High Court To Review Science Teacher's Firing

As reported by the Columbus Dispatch, the Ohio Supreme Court last week agreed to hear an appeal in Freshwater v. Mount Vernon City School District Board of Education. (Links to court filings and grant of review.) In the case, a state appeals court upheld the firing of John Freshwater, a middle school school science teacher. The school board based the firing on Freshwater's injecting his religious views, including belief in Creationism, into the classroom and for insubordination in failing to remove certain religious materials from the classroom after being ordered to do so by the school board. (See prior related posting.) The Court granted review on two issues: (1) whether Freshwater could be fired if the school board has not provided a clear indication of the kinds of materials or teaching methods that are unacceptable; and (2) whether the mere presence of religious texts from the school's library and/or the display of a patriotic poster can justify his firing. [Thanks to Don Byrd for the lead.]

Is A Homeless Shelter A "Church" In Zoning Code?

In Lexington, Kentucky on Friday, a lawsuit was filed in state circuit court by Emmanuel Apostolic Church and the Catholic Action Center challenging the city Board of Adjustment's vote last month to revoke their conditional use permit under which they are operating the Community Inn as a homeless shelter. The city wants to move the shelter after reports of loitering, panhandling and residents urinating in public. As reported by the Lexington Herald-Leader, under the Lexington Fayette County Urban Zoning Ordinance, Art. 8, "churches" may be granted a conditional use permit to use property in areas zoned B-4 (wholesale and warehouse use). The city said that during the permitting process they assumed that the building would be used as a traditional church. Only days before it opened did neighbors realize that the Community Inn would house up to 75 homeless men overnight. The shelter also provides several Bible courses during the week and traditional religious services on Saturday mornings. The lawsuit raises the question of the proper definition of "church" under the city's zoning laws. One of the pastors involved argues: "Wherever the will of the Lord is being done, that's a church."

New York AG Settles With Municipal Hospitals On Religious Accommodation

The New York Attorney General's office announced Friday that it had reached a settlement on religious accommodation with the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation-- the largest municipal health care organization in the country. The settlement institutes best practices at HHC's facilities, including Jacobi Medical Center, to make certain that employee accommodation requests are handled in accordance with state and federal anti-discrimination laws. As reported by the blog Vos Iz Neias?, the Attorney General's investigation of the matter stems from complaints by Orthodox Jewish and Seventh Day Adventist nurses at Bronx's Jacobi Medical Center who claimed they were not being allowed to modify their work schedules so they could observe their Sabbath. [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Tamar Hostovsky Brandes, Separate and Different: Single-Sex Education and the Quest for Equality, (Israel Law Review 45(2) 2012, pp. 235-266).
• Mark L. Movsesian, Crosses and Culture: State-Sponsored Religious Displays in the U.S. and Europe, (Oxford Journal of Law and Religion, 2012).
• Kathryn E. Kovacs, Alleviating the Tension between Species Preservation and Religious Freedom, (July 2, 2012).
• Myles Frederick McLellan, Jehovah's Witnesses and Child Protection Legislation: The Right to Refuse Medical Consent, (July 4, 2012).
• Andrew F, March and Naz K. Modirzadeh, Ambivalent Universalism? Jus ad bellum in Modern Islamic Legal Discourse, (European Journal of International Law, Forthcoming).
• Ryan C. Tuck, Parting the Red Sea: The Religious Case for LGBT Equality, (July 6, 2012).
• Brian Leiter, Waldron on the Regulation of Hate Speech, (Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews, 2012 Forthcoming).
• Mohamed Ariff, Meysam Safari and Shamsher Mohamad, Sukuk Securities, Their Definitions, Classification and Pricing Issues, (in M. Ariff, M. Iqbal & S. Mohamed (Eds.), The Islamic Debt Market for Sukuk Securities: The Theory and Practice of Profit Sharing Investment (pp. 11-41), Cheltenham). 

From SmartCILP and elsewhere:

• Conference: The Theology of Work and the Dignity of Workers, 50 Journal of Catholic Legal Studies 1-316 (2011).
• R. Glei and S. Reichmuth, Religion Between Last Judgement, Law and Faith: Koranic Dīn and Its Rendering in Latin Translations of the Koran, [Abstract], (Religion 42, No. 2, 2012, 247-271).

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Baker v. Buckner, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90443 (D CO, June 29, 2012), a Colorado federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2012 U.D. Dist. LEXIS 90502, May 15, 2012) and dismissed with leave to amend a Muslim inmate's claim that his free exercise rights were violated when his religious pictures, Bible, Qur'an, prayer rug, and other books were confiscated. His due process claims as to the confiscation were dismissed with prejudice.

In Johnson v. Heyns, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90968 (WD MI, July 2, 2012), a Michigan federal district court dismissed claims against some defendants, but permitted an inmate to proceed against others, in his claim that his free exercise rights were infringed when documents containing prayers, myths and depictions of his Mexica-Aztec religion were confiscated and when he and others were no longer be permitted to conduct their prayer circle using the Nahuatl language.

In Young v. Hooks, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91740 (SD GA, July 2, 2012), a Georgia federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation and allowed an inmate to proceed against the warden (but dismissed the Attorney General as a defendant) in a claim that plaintiff was not allowed to have certain sacred items that are necessary to perform rituals and ceremonies.

In Wallace v. Miller, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91295 (SD IL, March 5, 2012), an Illinois federal magistrate judge recommended allowing an inmate to proceed on RLUIPA and free exercise claims against a Department of Corrections contract Rabbi. Plaintiff alleged that he had converted to an orthodox form of Judaism, but was unsuccessful in obtaining religious items, dietary services, opportunities to fast, worship, observe religious holidays, and receive religious instruction. Apparently defendant rabbi did not consider plaintiff to be Jewish.

In Pettiford v. Davis, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92020 (SD IN, July 3, 2012), an Indiana federal district court dismissed the RLUIPA and free exercise claims of plaintiff who, while held in home detention, was disciplined for drug use violations by being confined at home. Plaintiff had claimed his religious rights were violated because during this period he was not permitted to attend church services.

In Anello v. Williams, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90615 (D OR, June 28, 2012), an Oregon federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90599, March 20, 2012) and dismissed claims by a Native American inmate who is a Thelemite, who argues that his 1st Amendment and RLUIPA rights were infringed. While he was on STM cell restriction for 6 days, plaintiff's religious materials were confiscated and he was denied access to religious services.

NY Marriage Equality Act Survives Open Meeting Act Challenge

In New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms v New York State Senate, (NY App. Div., July 6, 2012) a New York state appeals court rejected a challenge to the state's Marriage Equality Law (which permits same-sex marriage) enacted last year. Plaintiffs claimed that private lobbying of the Republican Conference of the State Senate in favor of the law by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Governor Andrew Cuomo violated the Open Meetings Act. The court concluded that the exemption in the Open Meetings Law for deliberations of political caucuses, including invited staff or guests, covered the lobbying being challenged. It rejected the argument that the exemption for invited guests only includes guests of the same political party as the caucus. Advocate.com reports on the decision.

Sudan's Leader Promises 100% Islamic Constitution

Reuters reports that in Sudan today President Omar Hassan al-Bashir in a speech to Sufi Islamic leaders promised that Sudan's next constitution will be 100% Islamic.  He said in part:

We want to present a constitution that serves as a template to those around us. And our template is clear, a 100 percent Islamic constitution, without communism or secularism or Western (influences).And we tell non-Muslims, nothing will preserve your rights except for Islamic sharia because it is just.

Al-Bashir, who has been in power for 23 years and is wanted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes in Darfur, gave no date for the new constitution. Sudan's opposition parties have called for strikes and protests to topple al-Bashir's government.

Suit Challenges Community College's Speaker and Literature Distribution Rules

The Thomas More Society yesterday filed a lawsuit in federal district court in Ohio challenging the speaker access and literature distribution rules of Sinclair Community College in Dayton, Ohio. The suit was brought on behalf  of two students who are members of the college’s Traditional Values Club and the founder of two pro-life groups who is often invited to speak on campuses. The complaint (full text) in Deddens v. Warren County Montgomery County Community College District, (SD OH, filed 7/6/2012) alleges that the College’s policies place broad restrictions on the distribution of materials on campus, require advance approval of speakers with broad discretion in the college president to deny an application, and prohibit recognized student clubs from hosting more than two events per month. The school also prohibits any kinds of signs, whether by sponsors or protesters, at student events. The suit alleges that these rules and policies operate as prior restraints on speech and are overbroad regulations that have a chilling effect on speech.

Discrimination Claim By Fired Employee Who Asked Customer About Religion Is Dismissed

In Botnik v. HearingPlanet Inc., (MD YN, July 3, 2012), a Tennessee federal district court dismissed as unproven Title VII and state employment discrimination claims by a sales representative for a hearing aid company. Plaintiff, who says his national origin is Russian Israeli and his religion if Christian Jewish, was fired after his co-workers complained he was involved in an inappropriate telephone conversation with a customer. In the conversation, plaintiff asked the customer about her national origin and asked whether her husband was Jewish. Plaintiff cites the company's policy of trying to establish rapport with the customer, but the company fired him on the ground that he had asked inappropriate questions of a customer that made his co-workers uncomfortable. [Thanks to CCH Employment Law Daily via Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

Feared Impact on Military Chaplains of DADT Repeal Has Not Materialized

A lengthy AP article published Wednesday concludes that despite dire warnings to the contrary, the military's elimination of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy has created no serious infringements of military chaplains' free exercise rights or rights of conscience. At most, 2 or 3 chaplains' departures from active duty were related to the policy's repeal. Even outspoken opponent of repeal, Archbishop Timothy Broglio of the Catholic Archdiocese for the Military Services, says he is unaware of any major problems that have arisen because of the repeal. "It’s more a question of what might occur in the future," he said, adding, "As time goes by, it will be a challenge, to make certain you’re not silently condoning." According to the article:

The loudest assertions that conservative chaplains face problems come from outside the active-duty ranks, notably from a coalition of retired chaplains and other religious leaders called the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty. In a letter to a Republican congressman in March, the alliance contended that repeal has been implemented “with an open and palpable hostility” to chaplains and service members who disapprove of homosexuality.

[Thanks to Pew Forum for the lead.] 

Drunk Driver's Sentence Includes Study of Book of Job

The Rock HIll (SC) Herald reported yesterday that a respected state trial court judge has sentenced a woman who pleaded guilty to drunk driving to 8 years in jail, 5 years probation and substance abuse counseling. In addition Judge Michael Nettles is requiring her to read the Biblical book of Job and write a summary of it.  Defendant Cassandra Tolley's attorney says that Tolley is "thankful for the assignment" and has already started working on it. Tolley, a long-time victim of abuse who then turned to alcohol, is remorseful for the serious injuries she caused to two people in the car crash that resulted from her driving with a blood alcohol level 4 times the legal limit.

Jewish Institutions Awarded Most of the Federal Security Grants for Non-Profits

Last week, the federal Department of Homeland Security announced the final allocations for seven FY 2012 Preparedness Grant programs. One of the programs is the Nonprofit Security Grant Program that for the coming fiscal year provides $10 million for hardening targets and enhancing physical security at nonprofit organizations that are at high risk of a terrorist attack and are located in certain urban areas. The Forward reported yesterday that Jewish institutions received 97% of the 2012 grants under this program. The program has particularly benefited Jewish organizations since it was begun in 2005. (See prior related posting.) DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano has explained this, saying that there are special terrorism risks facing the Jewish community. Also the Jewish community has been particularly aware of the grant program. In an interesting choice of words,William Daroff of the Jewish Federations of North America defended the allocations saying: "This is not pork. This is Homeland Security officials making decisions based on threat levels."

Scientist Says "God Particle" Nickname For Higgs Boson Could Offend

As reported by the Washington Post, scientists in Geneva, Switzerland yesterday announced that they had found the elusive Higgs boson, a sub-atomic particle that gives mass to other particles. The particle has sometimes been referred to as the "God particle" because it is so fundamental that without it nothing could exist. Christianity Today reports on why scientists do not like the "God particle" nickname. Peter Higgs, who predicted the existence of the particle, has said:

I find it embarrassing because, though I'm not a believer myself, I think it is the kind of misuse of terminology which I think might offend some people.

Committee Of Egypt's Constitution Drafting Panel Narrows Religious Liberty Protections

In Egypt, the country's new constitution is being drafted by a 100-person Constituent Assembly representing an array of interests. (See prior posting.) Yesterday, citing the Middle East News Agency, Aswat Masriya reported that the Constituent Assembly's Rights and Freedoms Committee has agreed on wording that narrows the protection of religious freedom.  Art. 46 of the current constitution provides: "The State shall guarantee the freedom of belief and the freedom of practice of religious rites." Reportedly the new agreed-upon language is:

Religious freedom is complete and the state guarantees freedom of worship for believers in heavenly religions.

The limitation of protections to "heavenly" religions is seen as excluding Shiites and Baha’is.  Only two members of the committee objected to the new language.

State High Court Review Sought of Discrimination Finding In Refusal To Photograph Same-Sex Ceremony

A photography firm is asking the New Mexico Supreme Court to review a decision in which a state appellate court found a violation of the state's anti-discrimination law when the firm refused to provide its services to photograph a same-sex commitment ceremony. (See prior posting.) The petition for certiorari to the state's high court (full text) in Elane Photography, LLC v. Willock, (filed 6/27/2012) raises compelled speech, free exercise and state RFRA arguments. [Thanks to Neil Davis for the lead.]

Court Accepts Settlement In 10 Commandments In Schools Case

Today's Roanoke Times reports that a Virginia federal district court yesterday accepted the parties' settlement agreement and formally dismissed a lawsuit against the Giles County (VA) School Board that had been brought to challenge the schools' posting of Ten Commandment displays in the schools.  As previously reported, the Board had already agreed to replace the Ten Commandments text that was displayed at Narrows High School with a copy of a page from a history textbook captioned "Roots of Democracy." [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Woman Excluded From Catholic Church's Masses Loses Lawsuit Challenging Actions

In Lye v. City of Lacey, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91523 (WD WA, June 29, 2012), a Washington federal district court dismissed a suit that was brought against the Seattle Catholic archdiocese and its pastoral coordinator, as well as against the city of Lacey, Washington, by a woman who had been barred by the Church, through formal trespass warnings, from attending Mass at the largely Korean Sacred Heart parish. The Church's move came after plaintiff continued to advocate for resumption of a Mass given in Korean.  The court held that as to the Church and its officials, no 1st Amendment claims are available because they are not state actors.  It also found that plaintiff had not alleged sufficient facts to support either a conspiracy or an outrage claim. It  dismissed plaintiff's defamation claim because she failed to name as a party the priest who had allegedly made the statement. The court did partially grant plaintiff's motion to amend her pleadings, but only to add a new party as defendant in the defamation claim.

Sacred Sufi Shrines Destroyed By Islamists In Mali

In northern Mali last week, the Islamist (and Al-Qaeda allied) Ansar Dine ("Defenders of Faith") ousted the Tuareg MNLA rebels from the famed town of  Timbuktu. As reported by AFP, even though the Tuareg rebels spearheaded the takeover of northern Mali by various opposition groups last March, now the Islamists have moved to take over control. Then, over the weekend, according to the Christian Science Monitor, Ansar Dine destroyed seven historic tombs and the door to an ancient mosque in Timbuktu. These sites were already on UNESCO's heritage danger list. The tombs are sacred shrines for local Sufi Muslims, but the Islamist say that they amount to idolatry. The International Criminal Court quickly issued a statement calling the destruction a potential war crime. ABC News has more detail on the holy places that were destroyed. The Organization of Islamic Cooperation called the destruction the work of "bigoted extremist elements." An AFP report dated Wednesday says that Economic Community of West African States has 3,300 troops ready to enter Mali, but it is awaiting either a U.N. resolution authorizing their use, or a stronger unity government in Mali that can request the troops.

Israeli Committee On Law To Draft Haredi Into the Military Is Dissolved

In Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu yesterday disbanded the so-called Plesner Committee that was supposed to create a new law to end the exemption from the military draft for haredi (ultra-Orthodox) Jews after Israel's Supreme Court struck down the Tal law which gave yeshiva students exemptions. Haaretz reported yesterday that two of the government coalition partners withdrew from the committee last week after it would not go far enough in meeting their demands that all Israeli Arabs (who are now draft exempt) be subject to the draft. Then the haredi representative on the committee left over threats to use personal sanctions against ultra-Orthodox men who avoid military service. Netanyahu said: "Unfortunately, the committee could not reach an agreed-upon formulation and it could not form a recommendation that would garner a majority in the Knesset."

UPDATE: Jerusalem Post reports that despite the Prime Minister's dissolution of the Plesner Committee, on Wednesday (July 4) Committee chairman Yohanan Plesner at a news conference presented the committee's recommendations in his own name. The recommendations call for a complex arrangement that would result in most haredi men serving in an obligatory national service by the time they reach age 23 or else facing a significant fine.

Police Officer Sues Claiming He Was Fired Because He Converted To Islam

A former Norton, Ohio police officer filed suit in federal district court in Ohio yesterday claiming that he was fired because of his conversion to Islam. The Akron Beacon Journal reports that according to plaintiff Nicholas Matheny, Police Chief Thad Hete found out about his conversion in September 2010 when Matheny handed out wedding invitations. When Matheny returned from his honeymoon, Hete and the city's chief administrator tried to convince him to resign, threatening to place backdated warnings in his police file. When Matheny refused, he was fired.

Austria Celebrates 100th Anniversary of Its Inclusive Law on Islam

Last weekend, senior Austrian government officials and members of Austria's Islamic community attended ceremonies to mark the 100th anniversary of Austria's Law on Islam.  BBC reports that the law is seen as a model of tolerance in Europe.  The law as originally enacted provided:

The adherents of Islam shall be granted recognition as a religious community in the kingdoms and crown-lands represented in the Imperial Council in the meaning of the Constitutional Law of 21 December, 1867... The religious community of the adherents of Islam according to the Hanafite rite shall... enjoy the same legal protection as is granted to other legally recognised religious communities. The doctrines of Islam, its institutions and customs shall enjoy the same protection too, unless they are in contradiction to state law.

The law, which was later expanded to include other forms of Islam in addition to Hanafi, came into force in 1912 as an attempt to integrate Muslim Bosnian soldiers into the Habsburg Army.

Ballot Title For Minnesota Same-Sex Marriage Ban Amendment Creates Controversy

Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie announced last week that the title of the proposed state constitutional amendment banning recognition same-sex marriage (full text) that will appear on the November ballot will be "Limiting the Status of Marriage to Opposite Sex Couples."  According to the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, backers of the amendment are furious. They had wanted the ballot title to read: "Recognition of Marriage Solely Between One Man and One Woman"-- the title chosen by the state legislature. Even though the legislature prescribed a title for the ballot measure, the governor vetoed the bill containing the proposed amendment. (Veto letter.) However the veto does not prevent the measure from appearing on the ballot because the Minnesota Constitution Art. IX provides that amendments are submitted to the voters by a majority of the members of each house. However apparently the portion of the bill setting the title for the ballot measure is treated as ordinary legislation so that the veto did invalidate that section. So then under Minnesota Statutes Sec. 204D.15, the choice of a title falls to the secretary of state, who must submit it to the attorney general for approval. Backers of the amendment believe that the new title may influence voters who do not like government restrictions to vote against the measure. They are considering whether to file a lawsuit over the title. [Thanks to Alliance Alert for the lead.]

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Steven H. Resnicoff, Extraordinary Sources of Jewish Law: the Example of Capital Punishment,, (Steven H. Resnicoff, Chapter 8 of Understanding Jewish Law, LexisNexis, 2012).
• Rene Provost, Magic and Modernity in Tintin au Congo (1930) and the Sierra Leone Special Court, (June 25, 2012).
• Nicolai N. Petro, The Role of the Orthodox Church in a Changing Russia, (ISPI Analysis #121, Institute for the Study of International Politics, Milan, Italy, June 2012).
• David A. Grenardo, Samuel D. Davis and Thomas M. Gutting, Take One Step Forward: Federal Courts Continue to Find that Volunteers are Shielded from Retaliation Based on Protected Speech Under the First Amendment, (First Amendment Law Review, Vol. 10, No. 1, 2011).
• Lewis D. Solomon, God and Human Destiny: A Jewish Perspective, (GWU Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2012-53).
• Richard S. Myers, Same-Sex Marriage, Education, and Parental Rights, (Brigham Young University Education and Law Journal, Vol. 2011, No. 2).
• Richard S. Myers, Assessing the Legal Bases for Conscientious Objection in Healthcare, (Life and Learning XVIII: The Proceedings of the Eighteenth University Faculty for Life Conference 57-82, J. Koterski ed. 2011).
• Mehmet Asutay and Zulkifli Bin Hasan, An Analysis of the Courts’ Decisions on Islamic Finance Disputes, (ISRA International Journal of Islamic Finance, 3 (2), 41-71, 2011).
• Kimberley Brownlee and Richard Child, Can the Law Help Us to Be Moral?, (Warwick School of Law Research Paper No. 2012/17).
• Kimberley Brownlee, Conscientious Objection and Civil Disobedience, (Warwick School of Law Research Paper No. 2012/15).

Connecticut Mosque Sues Over Zoning Refusal

The Hour reports that Norwalk, Connecticut's Al-Madany Islamic Center last week filed a suit in federal district court charging that its 1st Amendment free exercise rights, its rights under RLUIPA and under Connecticut's Religious Freedom Act were violated when the Norwalk Zoning Commission rejected its plans for a new mosque and multipurpose hall. The lawsuit claims that the usual factors that lead to zoning approval were discounted in the face of strong discriminatory opposition to the zoning application.

UNESCO Places Church of Nativity On Heritage List In Move With Political Ramifications

UNESCO announced last week that the Church of the Nativity, known to Christians as the birthplace of Jesus, has been added to UNESCO's World Heritage List and also to UNESCO's "List of World Heritage in Danger" because of damage to the Church from water leaks. UNESCO's World Heritage Committee voted 13-6 with 2 abstentions in favor of the designation.  As with much in the region, the move has been viewed by many as more jockeying in the Israeli-Palestinian dispute.  As reported by Haaretz, the Church was added to UNESCO's list through an emergency procedure rather than through the regular 18-month process.The United States, UNESCO's experts committee, and the three churches that are custodians of the site all preferred use of the lengthier regular process. Palestinians see the quick action as an affirmation of Palestinian sovereignty over the site, while Israel sees it as evidence that UNESCO was acting for political rather than cultural reasons. Last year after the Palestinian Authority failed to obtain full membership status in the United Nations as a whole, UNESCO voted to admit Palestine as a full member, prompting United States cutoff of funding to UNESCO. (Background.)

Cert. Petition Filed In Defense of Marriage Act Challenge

A petition for certiorari (full text) was filed Friday in Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the U.S. House of Representatives v. Gill. In the case, decided by the 1st Circuit under the title Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the appeals court held unconstitutional Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act that denies federal benefits to same-sex couples (and surviving same-sex spouses) lawfully married in Massachusetts and other states. (See prior posting.)  The Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group that filed the cert. petition was intervenor-appellant in the court of appeals below.  SCOTUS Blog reports on the filing of the cert. petition. [Thanks to Alliance Alert for the lead.]

German Political Leaders Say Religious Circumcision Should Be Protected

According to AP, Germany's foreign minister Guido Westerwelle moved today to reassure critics after a controversial German court ruling last week held that young boys' rights were infringed when parents decided to have them circumcised for religious reasons. Westerwelle said:

The free exercise of religion is protected in Germany. That includes religious traditions. All our partners in the world should know that.

Volker Beck, an opposition Green Party senior lawmaker, said that it should be clarified that circumcision on religious grounds is justified as long as hygienic and medical standards are met. However he left open the question of whether this clarification should be obtained through the courts or by legislation.

Meanwhile YNet News reports that Jewish Hospital in Berlin has decided to suspend all circumcisions of children for religious reasons until the legal situation is clarified.

UPDATE: The full text of the court's decision in the case is now available via UK Human Rights Blog. The original decision in German is here. An English translation is here. [Thanks to Eric Rassbach via Religionlaw listserv.]

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Walker v. Cate, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86987 (ED CA, June 21, 2012), a California federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing claims by a white Christian/Odinist inmate that his rights under the free exercise clause and RLUIPA were violated when he was classified as eligible for double celling with inmates of other races. Plaintiff claimed that his religious beliefs forbid him from sharing a cell with someone of another race.

In Vann v. Fischer, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87620 (SD NY, June 20, 2012), a New York federal district court permitted an inmate who was a practitioner of Santeria to move forward on free exercise, RLUIPA and equal protection claims. Plaintiff alleged that he was not allowed to wear Santeria beads.

In Davis v. Armenta, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88381 (ED CA, June 25, 2012), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed as frivolous an inmate's claim for $999 trillion in damages after the sheriff tore down a picture of a Thompson sub-machine that hung on plaintiff's bunk bed. Plaintiff claimed that the image of the sub-machine gun was his god/goddess.

In La Vell Harris v. Lake County Jail, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89306 (ND CA, June 27, 2012), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed with leave to amend an inmate's free exercise claim against a jail nurse. Plaintiff claimed his religion prevents him from taking pain medication (other than marijuana), that he cannot stand or walk without pain, and that he was denied a wheel chair. His claim of religious and racial discrimination was dismissed with prejudice.

In Blum v. Clements, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89813 (D CO, June 28, 2012), a Colorado federal magistrate judge, while dismissing many of plaintiff inmate's claims, permitted plaintiff to move ahead on a free exercise and RLUIPA complaint that he was required to surrender various art works, including religious art, and was terminated from the sex offender treatment program for refusing to write essays on how images of minors were high risk and how he used "religiosity" as a tactic to avoid treatment.

In Villanueva v. River, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89399 (D SC, June 28, 2012), a South Carolina federal district court held that an inmate's free exercise claims are not cognizable in a habeas corpus proceeding. Plaintiff complained that federal prison officials refused to accommodate his "Kingism" religious beliefs by not allowing him to wear his religion's colors. He sought prison recognition of his religion.

In Quinn v. Knab, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89479 (SD OH, June 27, 2012), an Ohio federal magistrate judge recommended that an inmate, a white separatist "Christian Identity" adherent, be allowed to proceed with his free exercise and RLUIPA challenges to prison officials' refusal to permit him to take the Nazarite vow which entails restrictions on cutting hair, foods consumed, and working on the Sabbath. The court rejected plaintiff's equal protection and retaliation claims.

In Sousa v. Wegman, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90023 (ED CA, June 27, 2012), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed with leave to amend an inmate's complaint that prison officials refused to accommodate his Mexican Indian (Aztec/Mayan/Toltec) religion and instead required him to use an existing Native American religious services program.

In Crosby v. Lee, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90090 (WD VA, June 28. 2012), a Virginia federal district court dismissed without prejudice a Muslim inmate's suit against a jail superintendent complaining that he was deprived of the opportunity to attend Friday Jumm'ah services, he was denied his prayer rug, and he was not alerted when meals contained pork.

In Johns v. Lemmon, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89901 (ND IN, June 26, 2012), an Indiana federal district court permitted plaintiff, who claimed to be an "observant Jewish prisoner," to proceed with his suit alleging that a fundamental tenet of his religious beliefs is that he cannot eat food cooked on Saturday, and that prison officials have stopped their previous practice of providing him his food for Saturday on Friday night.

Church Autonomy Doctrine Does Not Bar Defamation and Breach of Fiduciary Duty Claims

In Bilbrey v. Myers, (FL App., June 29, 2012), a Florida state appellate court reversed a trial court's reliance on the church autonomy doctrine and permitted a former church member, Darrel Bilbrey, to proceed with his defamation and breach of fiduciary duty claims against the church's pastor David Myers. Originally Myers sponsored Bilbrey to obtain a license to minister in the Pentecostal church.  Subsequently Myers came to believe that Bilbrey was gay and claimed that  Bilbrey's upcoming marriage was a sham to hide his homosexuality. Myers made these charges of homosexuality during a meeting with Bilbrey and three others; in a sermon; and to Bilbrey's pastor in Michigan after Bilbrey moved and sought to have his ministerial license transferred there.  The court held:

The First Amendment does not grant Myers, as pastor of FPC, carte blanche to defame church members and ex-members. If untrue, the statement that a person is a homosexual has long been recognized as potentially defamatory outside the context of any religious doctrine or practice. This claim can be adjudicated without implicating the First Amendment and was improperly dismissed on the basis of the church autonomy doctrine.... 

As to Bilbrey's claim for breach of fiduciary duty—based on allegations that Myers had a fiduciary duty to Bilbrey because of the pastor/church member relationship and the internet filtration and accountability program [in which Myers was Bilbrey's "accountability partner"]—the First Amendment does not necessarily bar such claims.

Plaintiff's intentional infliction of emotional distress and invasion of privacy claims were dismissed.

Michigan Outlaws Disrupting Religious Services

As reported by WLNS News, last Monday (legislative history) Michigan Governor Rick Snyder signed HB 5560 (full text) making it a misdemeanor to enter or remain on property, or obstruct entry or exit to property, with the intent of disrupting individuals meeting there in the pursuit of their free exercise of religion. First offenders may be sentenced to up to 93 days in jail, $1000 fine or 100 hours of community service.

District Court's Permanent Injunction Lets Churches Rent New York School Building Space On Weekends

In Bronx Household of Faith v. Board of Education of the City of New York, (SD NY, June 29, 2012), a New York federal district court issued a permanent injunction barring the New York City board of education from enforcing a rule that keeps churches from renting out space in school buildings for their weekly services. While generally allowing community groups to rent out space outside normal school hours for meetings and activities, Chancellor’s Regulation D-180 precludes rental by churches that wish to use the space for worship services or wish to use the school space as a house of worship. Earlier this year, the court granted a preliminary injunction in the 17-year long dispute over the regulation. (See prior posting.) In granting the permanent injunction the court held that the Regulation violates plaintiff’s free exercise rights, saying that the rule imposes “a substantial burden on Plaintiffs’ free exercise rights,” while the school board raises only “a misperceived Establishment Clause concern.”.

The court found, further, that as administered Regulation D-180 violates the Establishment Clause by involving Board of Education officials in determining whether or not a group’s proposed activities amount to religious worship or use of the school building as a house of worship. This type of Board review requires state officials to inquire into religious doctrine. Alliance Defense Fund issued a press release announcing the court’s decision. The New York Times yesterday reported on the decision. Bloomberg News reports that the city plans an immediate appeal.

Supreme Court Denies Cert. In Free Exercise Challenge To Affordable Care Act

After yesterday's historic decisions, the U.S. Supreme Court today denied certiorari (Order List) in other cases involving challenges to the Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act. The petition for certiorari (full text) in at least one of those cases, Docket No. 11-679, Seven-Sky v. Holder, had raised a free exercise challenge to the ACA. In the case, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals had given short shrift to challengers' Religious Freedom Restoration Act argument, holding that appellants had "failed to allege facts showing that the mandate will substantially burden their religious exercise." (See prior posting.) For a lengthier discussion of free exercise challenges to the individual mandate, see my posting from yesterday.

Religious Interrogatories Quashed On Privacy and Free Exercise Grounds

In Guthrey v. California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89174 (ED CA, June 27, 2012), a California federal magistrate judge sustained objections by defendants in a religious discrimination lawsuit to interrogatories put forward by plaintiff Raymond Guthrey regarding the individual defendant's religious beliefs.  Guthrey, an adherent of the Ananda Marga faith, was prevented by Department of Corrections employee Michael Pate, Jr. from participating in the Department of Corrections Retired Annuitant Program. Guthrey, who had been approved as a Correctional Counselor in that program, contended that Pate's actions were motivated, at least in part, by his dislike of Guthrey's religion.  Seven of plaintiff's interrogatories asked about Pate's religious beliefs and attendance at religious services. Plaintiff claimed that answers would lead to information regarding defendant's likely level of religious and racial intolerance. The court disagreed, holding that the interrogatories are irrelevant, and that even if they are not, defendant's right to privacy and the 1st Amendment protection of his religious associations allow him to refuse to answer. The court said in part:

[I]f this Court were to become a "sword" of Title VII plaintiffs used to gain access to unfettered inquisitions into an individual's most private and intimate religious views, a "chilling" impact on religious associational rights would result. Plaintiff asks this Court to compel disclosure so that the information may be used to attain monetary damages for such religious beliefs. Such circumstances would substantially burden both the individual's and the group's ability and inclination to freely pursue their religious beliefs and practices.

The court did allow Guthrey to pursue interrogatories regarding any past religious discrimination complaints against defendants, but allowed defendants to omit the names of the complainants in order to protect their privacy.

3rd Circuit: Ousted Church Member May Not Sue On Behalf of Church

In Askew v. Trustees of the General Assembly of the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ of the Apostolic Faith, Inc., (3d Cir., June 28, 2012), the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals held that plaintiff, a member of a dissident faction in a Church, lost standing to continue a lawsuit charging Church leaders with misappropriation of assets once plaintiff's Church membership had been terminated by the Church's religious leader. Joseph Askew filed suit against Bishop Kenneth Shelton in January 2009. In August 2009, Shelton executed a sworn declaration stating that Askew and other dissidents had not been recognized as Church members since 1992 when the split occurred. The court held that Bishop Shelton's authority to excommunicate members "falls squarely within the realm of matters insulated from civil court review." The court added that "consistent with the nonentanglement principle,we accept [Shelton's] pronouncement as conclusive. Any other approach would embroil this Court in a two-decade-long intra-Church battle central to its mission and spiritual identity." The court went on to hold that once Askew had lost his Church membership, he no longer had standing to assert claims alleging harm to the Church. The court added:

A doctrinally grounded decision made during litigation to insulate questionable church actions from civil court review may indeed raise an inference of fraud or bad faith.... Under those circumstances, the integrity of the judicial system may outweigh First Amendment concerns such that a civil court may inquire into the decision.  But we find no basis for the inference here.

The Philadelphia Inquirer reports on the decision.

Diocese and Bishop Sued Over Sexual Abuse of Woman In Deliverance and Exorcism Sessions

In Arlington, Virginia last week, a woman filed suit in state court against the Catholic Diocese of Arlington, the bishop responsible for the diocese, and two pro-life organizations, seeking to hold them liable for injuries plaintiff suffered when she was sexually abused by a priest in the course of Spiritual Deliverance and the rite of exorcism. The suit seeks $5.35 million in damages. The complaint (full text) in Doe v. Catholic Diocese of Arlington, (VA Cir. Ct., filed 6/19/2012), alleges that plaintiff signed an "Agreement for spiritual help" with a priest, Thomas Enteneuer, under which he was to apply the spiritual resources of the Church to liberate plaintiff from a demonic infestation of unclean spirits. As Enteneur's sessions with plaintiff progressed over a two year period, he touched and kissed her sexually, telling her that he was blowing the Holy Spirit into her. He also digitally penetrated here. Enteneur eventually paid for moving plaintiff closer to him, and hired her through pro-life organizations he headed. The suit claims that the Diocese and related defendants should be held liable for Enteneur's actions.  Plaintiff alleged claims for assault, battery, intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress, negligent entrustment and negligent retention. Courthouse News Service and the Huffington Post report on the lawsuit. According to the Palm Beach Post, other women have made similar charges against Eneneur, who has been recalled by his Palm Beach Diocese.

4th Circuit Upholds Released Time Program of South Carolina School District

In Moss v. Spartanburg County School District Seven, (4th Cir., June 28, 2012), the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Spartanburg's released time program that permits high school students to receive two academic credits for off-campus religious instruction offered by a private Bible school. Grades are funneled through an accredited private Christian school that reviews and monitors the program, and the grades are then transferred to the student's public school transcript. The program is authorized by the state's Released Time Credit Act. (See prior posting.) Approximately 20 out of the school's 1500 students take the religion course each year. Finding that only some of the plaintiffs had standing to challenge the program, the court went on to conclude that under Supreme Court and 4th Circuit precedent, the Spartanburg program does not violate the Establishment Clause:

Here, the School District’s released time policy takes place off campus and expressly prohibits any use of public staff or funds for its execution.... The fact that a public school accepts credits for released time courses does not alter the analysis under any one of Lemon’s three prongs in view of the neutral administrative manner adopted by the School District for accepting those credits. The School District employed a model in which primary responsibility for evaluating released time courses lay with accredited private schools, not the public schools.

[Thanks to  Stephen Ruckman and Derek Gaubatz for the lead.]