Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Ricks v. Albitre, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 163200 (ED CA, Nov. 13, 2013), a California federal magistrate judge permitted an inmate to move forward with his 1st Amendment and RLUIPA claims against various defendants for failure to provide Wiccan religious services.

In Durbin v. Cain, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 163245 (MD LA, Nov. 15, 2013), a Louisiana federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 163632, Oct. 24, 2013), and dismissed a Jewish inmate's complaint that he was not permitted to use the prison chapel for Friday evening services and instead was required to use space in the security office.

In McCray v. Holmes, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 163423 (D NJ, Nov. 15, 2013), a New Jersey federal district court permitted a Jewish inmate to move ahead with his free exercise complaint that he was not furnished kosher meals. However his equal protection claim was dismissed without prejudice.

In Gambino v. Payne, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 164396 (WD NY, Nov. 18, 2013), a New York federal district court allowed an inmate to proceed with two free exercise complaints-- refusal to allow inmates to cover portions of the shower door to block a correctional officer's view of their genitals, and a complaint that plaintiff's kosher meals were repeatedly mutilated, contaminated and tampered with.

In Delavergne v. Washington State Department of Corrections, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 164639 (WD WA, Nov.19, 2013), a Washington federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 164643, Sept. 11, 2013) and dismissed without prejudice an inmate's rather incoherent free exercise claim that his therapy uses past and future behavior as teaching tools which do not conform with his belief that Jesus' "blood cleansed" him of his past behavior.

In Adekoya v. Herron, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 164575 (WD NY, Nov. 19, 2013), a New York federal district court dismissed complaints by plaintiff, an African immigrant of the Spiritism faith, that in the facility in which he was formerly detained his quest for practicing his faith was ignored, his requests to attend services were canceled and his request for a prayer mat was denied.

In Warrior v. Gonzalez, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 165387 (ED CA, Nov. 19, 2013), a California federal district court permitted an inmate to move ahead with his free exercise, establishment clause, equal protection and 4th amendment challenges to the policy of strip searching Muslim inmates attending religious programming during Ramadan.

In Blakemore v. Godinez, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 165610 (SD IL, Nov. 20, 2013), an Illinois federal district court allowed a Rastafarian inmate to proceed with his claim for an injunction against enforcement of an Illinois Department of Corrections policy that prevents him from wearing his hair in dreadlocks.

In Hawes v. Breiner, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 163949 (ND CA, Nov. 14, 2013), a California federal district court rejected an inmate's claim that his rights under the free exercise and establishment clauses were violated by the involuntary administration to him of anti-psychotic drugs.

Angola Steps Up Ban On Mosques In the Country

A report today from OnIslam indicates that the largely Christian country of Angola is stepping up its enforcement of the ban on Islam as an unrecognized religious group operating in the country.  The U.S. State Department's 2012 International Religious Freedom Report described Angolan policy:

Religious groups must petition for legal status with the justice and culture ministries....  By law, a religious group must have over 100,000 members and be present in 12 of the 18 provinces to gain legal status.... 

The high membership threshold for religious groups to acquire legal status restricted registration. The government continued to recognize 83 registered religious groups, but did not register any new groups.... More than 900 organizations have applied unsuccessfully for legal recognition since 1991. The government has not granted legal status to any Muslim groups. Over 2,000 organizations reportedly continued to operate without legal status. The government generally permitted these organizations to exist, function, and grow without legal recognition.

However, speaking last week to the Commission of the National Assembly, Angolan Minister of Culture Rosa Cruz e Silva said:

The process of legalization of Islam has not been approved by the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights, their mosques would be closed until further notice.... All sects on the list published by the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights in the Angolan newspaper Jornal de Angola are prohibited to conduct worship, so they should keep their doors closed.... In addition, we also have a long list of more than a thousand legalization applications.

Meanwhile Angolan President José Eduardo dos Santos said: "This is the final end of Islamic influence in our country." The Nigerian newspaper Osun Defender today says that these steps are designed to prevent the rise of Wahhabi ideology.

UPDATE: According to the Nov. 25 International Business Times , an official at the Angolan embassy in Washington, D.C. says that reports of a ban on Islam in Angola are erroneous, and that the country has freedom of religion.

Employer Offered Reasonable Accommodation To Muslim Employee For Noontime Prayer

In Farah v. A-1 Careers, (D KA, Nov. 20, 2013), a Kansas federal district court dismissed a claim by a Muslim former employee of a temporary staffing agency that the agency unreasonably failed to accommodate his need to pray at noontime. The court held:

Defendants reasonably accommodated Plaintiff’s religious beliefs by offering to let him go off-site daily for his noon prayers. Accordingly, Defendants were not required to consider other proposals and need not show that Plaintiff’s alternative proposals would result in undue hardship....  But assuming, arguendo, the need to do so, the Court finds undue hardship is an independent reason to grant Defendants summary judgment.

The court also concluded that plaintiff had not been constructively discharged.

Report Says Bishops Are Seeking Exit Strategy From Their Strong Opposition To Contraceptive Coverage Mandate

According to the National Catholic Reporter on Friday, despite strong disapproval of the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage mandate expressed in a Special Message issued Nov. 13 by U.S. Catholic Bishops at the conclusion of their Fall General Assembly, the bishops are not as united in their opposition as it may seem:

[A]fter repeatedly drawing that line in the sand, a growing number of bishops have begun to push back, arguing that such hard-line rhetoric has put them in an untenable position. These bishops do not want to close Catholic institutions over a birth control policy -- and they say they actually can't do so in most cases.

In addition, they argue that there is no reason to try -- the exemptions and accommodations in the mandate are sufficient, some say, and the church's teaching that access to good, affordable health care is a basic right should outweigh any remaining reservations.

That's why those familiar with the deliberations in Baltimore note that the statement is carefully worded to acknowledge that each bishop can make his own arrangements on health insurance -- as some are doing -- and it begins to provide cover for the entire hierarchy as the prelates try to find an exit strategy.

[Thanks to Perry Dane for the lead.] 

Shinto Is Growing Force In Japanese Politics

The Japan Times yesterday carried an interesting article on the growing influence of Shinto in Japanese politics. Japan’s education minister, Hakubun Shimomura, is concerned about the negative self-image Japanese high schoolers have. His solution is more moral and patriotic education. This is part of a broader political movement:

Many of the nation’s top elected officials, including [Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and Education Minister Shimomura] ... are members of ... Shinto Seiji Renmei (officially, the Shinto Association of Spiritual Leadership...). A sister organization, the Shinto Political Alliance Diet Members’ Association boasts 240 lawmakers, including 16 out of the government’s 19-member Cabinet....

Seiji Renmei sees its mission as renewing the national emphasis on "Japanese spiritual values." In principle, this means pushing for constitutional revision and patriotic and moral education, and staunchly defending conservative values....

The American Occupation of 1945-51 ended Shinto’s status as a state religion and attempted to banish its influence from Japan’s public sphere, notably its emphasis on a pure racial identity linked to the Emperor. The core element of this belief, ruthlessly enforced through the education system, was the emperor’s divine status as a direct descendant of the sun goddess Amaterasu. Though weakened, Shinto conservatives in Japan “were simply biding their time” until they could restore the religion’s rightful place in Japanese society.... 

Insular Jewish Sect Leaves Quebec For Ontario To Escape Child Welfare and Education Officials

In Canada last Monday, 40 Orthodox Jewish families who are members of the fundamentalist, anti-Zionist Lev Tahor ("Pure Heart") sect left their homes in Quebec province and moved to Ontario to escape education and child welfare officials in Quebec. The Toronto Star reported yesterday that the evacuees, which included some 130 children, say they object to requirements that they teach a secular curriculum to their home-schooled children.  Provincial officials say their concerns were more about child neglect, psychological abuse, poor nutrition and health problems than about education.  They have forwarded evidence they collected to Ontario officials. The insular Lev Tahor sect-- whose women dress in black robes that cover them from head to toe and show only their faces-- are led by Shlomo Helbrans who some claim has created a mind-controlled cult.  Before re-establishing his group 13 years ago in Canada, Helbrans served a prison term in New York for second degree kidnapping. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

UPDATE: According to the Times of Israel, on Nov. 26 a Quebec juvenile court judge ruled that 14 children from the Lev Tahor community are to be placed in foster care for a month and examined by doctors and psychologists. Apparently this order can be used by Ontario authorities to get a court order to return the children to foster care in Quebec.

Proposed Oregon Initiative Would Exempt Objecting Businesses From Involvement In Same-Sex Unions

The Oregonian reported that this week that a group known as Friends of Religious Freedom have filed a proposed initiative measure (full text) with the Oregon Secretary of State. It is designed to protect private individuals and businesses that have deeply held religious objections from being required to furnish goods, facilities or services for same-sex weddings or civil unions. Last February, the Oregon Attorney General's office opened an investigation into a baker who refused to furnish a wedding cake for a lesbian couple's marriage. (See prior posting.)  The proposed initiative responds to this and to similar applications of anti-discrimination laws elsewhere.  It provides that no individual or business entity acting in a nongovernmental capacity may be penalized by the state or a political subdivision, or subjected to a civil action:

for declining to solemnize, celebrate, participate in, facilitate, or support any same-sex marriage ceremony or its arrangements, same-sex civil union ceremony or its arrangements, or same-sex domestic partnership ceremony or its arrangements.

In a related development, last July supporters of same-sex marriage in Oregon filed with the Oregon Secretary of State a proposed Right to Marry and Religious Protection Initiative (full text). Supporters are currently seeking the 116,284 signatures necessary to get the proposed constitutional amendment on the ballot. Their website says they now have over 115,000 signatures. [Thanks to Alliance Alert for the lead.]

Court Holds That Tax Code's Parsonage Allowance Violates Establishment Clause

In Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Lew, (WD WI, Nov. 22, 2013), a Wisconsin federal district court held unconstitutional Internal Revenue Code Sec. 107(2) that excludes from gross income a minister's parsonage allowance. The court held that the exclusion "violates the establishment clause under the [U.S. Supreme Court's] holding in Texas Monthly, Inc. v. Bullock... because the exemption provides a benefit to religious persons and no one else, even though doing so is not necessary to alleviate a special burden on religious exercise."

An important issue in the case was plaintiffs' standing to bring the challenge.  FFRF co-presidents who were plaintiffs ultimately were found to have standing because of the non-excludable housing allowance they received as part of their compensation from FFRF. The court rejected the argument that plaintiffs should be seen as being entitled to claim the parsonage allowance as atheist ministers. The complaint in the case originally also challenged Sec. 107(1) that allows ministers who are furnished a home instead of a housing allowance to exclude the rental value of the home from income. Plaintiffs essentially conceded they lacked standing to pursue that challenge, and the court dismissed that aspect of their complaint. [Thanks to several readers who alerted me to the decision.]

White Earth Chippewa Indians Adopt New Constitution With Religious Protections

On Nov. 19, members of the White Earth Chippewa Nation in Minnesota adopted a new tribal constitution. (Full text.) According to the Indian tribe's website, the tribal council earlier this year voted unanimously to hold a referendum on the proposed draft that was the product of four Constitutional Conventions between 2007 and 2009.  In Tuesday's vote, 2,780 tribal members (79.61%) voted to approve the Constitution and 712 (20.39%) voted against it. According to Tuesday's Fargo Forum, the vote means that the White Earth Reservation is breaking away from the 5 other tribes that make up the Minnesota Chippewas. Included in the new constitution is this provision on religious freedom:

Chap. 3. Art. 1:The White Earth Nation shall make no laws that would establish a religion, or laws that would deny the free expression of religion, speech, or of the press and electronic communication.

This goes further than the provision in the federal Indian Civil Rights Act (25 USC Sec. 1302) which requires tribal governments to respect free exercise of religion, but does not ban the establishment of religion.  MRzine has further background on the White Earth Nation's new constitution.

Advocacy Groups Charge Michigan Banks Are Closing Muslim Customers' Bank Accounts

The Detroit News reported yesterday that CAIR-Michigan has asked the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to look into charges that JPMorgan Chase is closing bank accounts of Muslim customers in the metropolitan Detroit area. In July, the Arab-American Civil Rights League complained to the Justice Department and filed a class-action lawsuit making similar charges against Huntington National Bank.

Federal Court Says Contraceptive Coverage Accommodation For Religious Non-Profits Likely Violates RFRA As Non-Profit Suits Keep Being Filed

Yesterday a Pennsylvania federal district court became the first to weigh in on the merits of the accommodation provided for religious non-profit educational and charitable organizations that object to the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage mandate.  The court, finding a likelihood of success on the merits in plaintiffs' RFRA challenge to the final rules that were adopted in June, issued an expedited preliminary injunction.  In Zubik v. Sebelius, (WD PA, Nov. 21, 2013), the court said in part:

[A]lthough the “accommodation” legally enables Plaintiffs to avoid directly paying for the portion of the health plan that provides contraceptive products, services, and counseling, the “accommodation” requires them to shift the responsibility ... onto a secular source. The Court concludes that Plaintiffs have a sincerely-held belief that “shifting responsibility” does not absolve or exonerate them from the moral turpitude created by the “accommodation”; to the contrary, it still substantially burdens their sincerely-held religious beliefs.....

The application of these two regulations – one an exemption and one an accommodation – has the effect of dividing the Catholic Church into two separate entities. Now, one regulation (the “exemption”) applies to the worship arm of the Catholic Church and thus applies to all of those employees who work inside a church’s walls. While the other regulation (the “accommodation”) applies to the “good works” arms of the Catholic Church, and thus applies to those who stand on the church steps and pass out food and clothes to the needy.... [B]y dividing the Catholic Church in such a manner ..., the Government has created a substantial burden on Plaintiffs’ right to freely exercise their religious beliefs.

The court went on to hold that the exemption for churches themselves "is an acknowledgment of the lack of a compelling governmental interest" at least as to some employers. It then reasoned:

If the Court were to conclude that the Government’s stated interests were sufficiently “compelling” to outweigh the legitimate claims raised by the nonprofit, religious affiliated/related Plaintiffs, the net effect ... would be to allow the Government to cleave the Catholic Church into two parts: worship, and service and “good works,” thereby entangling the Government in deciding what comprises “religion.”

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports on the decision. [Thanks to Luke Goodrich for the lead.]

Meanwhile, another religious non-profit whose challenge originally posed ripeness problems (see prior posting)  has filed a new lawsuit challenging the contraceptive coverage mandate. The case is Belmont Abbey College v. Sebelius,(D DC, filed 11/20/2013) (full text of complaint; press release from Becket Fund).

Suit Challenges Teacher's Involvement In Weekly High School Prayer Group

The American Humanist Association yesterday announced the filing of a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a weekly Christian prayer session sponsored by the Fellowship of Christian Students at Fayette, Missouri High School. The complaint (full text) in American Humanist Association v. Fayette R-III School Distrct, (WD MO, filed 11/20/2013), alleges that the devotional sessions, held before the beginning of first period in the classroom of Gwen Pope, adviser to the Christian student group, violate the Establishment Clause. Plaintiffs say that Pope participated in the prayer sessions, in violation of school policy. Her husband, a former youth minister for a local Methodist church also attended the sessions. Plaintiffs also allege that the school principal endorsed and promoted the devotional sessions.

Swedish Jewish Activist Applies In Protest For Asylum In Her Own Country

Citing legal attacks in Sweden on kosher slaughter and ritual circumcision, a Jewish political adviser to the Swedish party Folkpartiet announced in an article in Mosaic Magazine that she is applying for refugee status in her own country.  Annika Hernroth-Rothstein wrote in part:

When it comes to our religious traditions, those on both the Right and Left in Swedish politics find common ground; they take pride in defending both animals and children from the likes of us, and from what one politician has called our “barbaric practices.”... 

EU statutes provide that asylum be granted to persons with “well-founded reasons to fear persecution due to race; nationality; religious or political beliefs; gender; sexual orientation; or affiliation to a particular social group.” Jews in Sweden meet these criteria, and should be eligible for the same protection and support extended to non-natives. 

And so today, November 18, I am legally filing for refugee status and asylum—not in America, not in Israel, but here in Sweden, my own country.

Absurd?  No doubt. I can only expect that my application will be summarily dismissed. But the situation is beyond absurdity, beyond op-eds and strongly worded letters of protest. The situation calls for action.

Clergyman Among Recipients of Presidential Medal of Freedom

In a ceremony at the White House yesterday, President Obama awarded Presidential Medals of Freedom to 16 individuals, including one member of the clergy-- Cordy Tindell "C.T." Vivian. (White House press release.) (Full text of President's remarks at the ceremony.) Vivian was a civil rights leader and friend of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. He participated in Freedom Rides and sit-ins around the country, and went on to found various civil rights organizations.  Religion News Service has more.

Illinois Governor Signs Marriage Equality Law; Catholic Bishop Responds With Exorcism Prayers

The Chicago Tribune reports that yesterday Illinois Governor Pat Quinn signed into law the Religious Freedom and Marriage Fairness Act, legalizing same-sex marriage in the state. (See prior related posting.) The law takes effect June 1, though some are pressing for additional legislation to speed up the effective date.  Meanwhile, in Springfield, Illinois, Catholic Bishop Thomas Paprocki held a a service, largely in Latin, to offer Prayers of Supplication and Exorcism in Reparation for the Sin of Same-Sex Marriage.  In his homily (full text), he said in part:

Our prayers at this time are prompted by the fact that the Governor of Illinois today is signing into Illinois law the redefinition of civil marriage, introducing not only an unprecedented novelty into our state law, but also institutionalizing an objectively sinful reality....

Our prayer service today and my words are not meant to demonize anyone, but are intended to call attention to the diabolical influences of the devil that have penetrated our culture, both in the state and in the Church....

Since the legal redefinition of marriage is contrary to God's plan, those who contract civil same-sex marriage are culpable of serious sin. Politicians responsible for enacting civil same-sex marriage legislation are morally complicit as co-operators in facilitating this grave sin.....

We must also affirm the teaching of the Catholic Church that homosexual persons "must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity....." The Church loves homosexual persons and looks upon them with compassion, offering assistance through support groups such as the Courage Apostolate to live in accord with the virtue of chastity.

Consent Decree In EEOC Suit Against Car Dealership That Refused To Hire Sikh

The EEOC announced yesterday the entry of a consent decree in a suit against a New Jersey car dealership for refusing to hire a Sikh man as a sales associate because his religiously-required beard did not meet the company's dress code. The decree in EEOC v. United Galaxy Inc., d/b/a Tri-County Lexus, (D NJ), orders the dealership to pay $50,000 in damages for failing to reasonably accommodate Gurpreet Kherha's religious exercise. The decree also enjoins future discrimination, requires anti-discrimination training of staff, and posting of related information.

Obama Criticized As Anti-Religious For Reading First Gettysburg Address Version

To mark yesterday's 150th Anniversary of Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, documentarian Ken Burns has urged everyone to video themselves reciting the Address. His Learn the Address website, which features a number of celebrities delivering the speech, points out that there are 5 versions of the Gettysburg Address.  Burns specifically asked President Obama to recite the "Nicolay Version"-- the earliest version of the speech which, among other things, does not include the reference to "God" that ended up in later versions. A number of conservative commentators and websites-- perhaps unaware of why the President did so-- strongly attacked Obama for "omitting God" in the Gettysburg Address. For example, a Liberty Counsel press release said:

After five years of tearing down religious liberty, it is neither surprising nor unexpected that President Obama disregarded “under God” when reciting the Gettysburg Address. Today the “new birth of freedom” means taking a stand against a tyrannical, antireligious assault at every level of government from the Department of Justice, to city halls, to the public schools.

And American Family Association Issue Analysis Director Bryan Fischer tweeted: "Obama's omission of 'under God' is more evidence of his anti-Christian bigotry. He honors Islam but disrespects Christianity."

According to a CBS News report:

White House spokesman Jay Carney on Tuesday gave a simple explanation for the reading. "He read the version of the address that Ken Burns provided," he said, noting that Burns is a "noted Civil War scholar."

Britain's Court of Appeal: Christian Radio Ad Barred By Ban On Political Advertising

Britain's Communications Act 2003 prohibits the broadcasting of any "advertisement which is directed towards a political end."  In London Christian Radio Ltd. v Radio Advertising Clearance Centre, (Ct. App., Nov. 19, 2013), the England & Wales Court of Appeal in a 2-1 decision held that a proposed ad from a publisher of Christian magazines that was to be run on a Christian radio station violates this ban.  The proposed ad stated:

We are CCP. Surveys have shown that over 60% of active Christians consider that Christians are being increasingly marginalised in the work place. We are concerned to get the most accurate data to inform the public debate. We will then use this data to help make a fairer society. Please visit CCPmagazines.co.uk and report your experiences.

In upholding the decision of the Radio Advertising Clearance Center to bar the ad, Lord Justice Dyson said in part:

What matters is the effect of an advertisement on political debate. The question is whether it will frustrate the statutory aim of ensuring that, so far as practicable, the playing field of political debate is level....

Lord Justice Elias dissenting said in part:

The only issue is whether, considered objectively and by focusing solely on the advertisement, the listener is being subjected to a partial political message.... The fact that the purpose is to enable the advertiser in future to seek to exert such influence and operate as a more effective pressure group does not in my judgment amount to an infringement of [the statute].

Huffington Post UK reports on the decision.

Note To Readers-- Still Working With Template

Religion Clause followers know I have been tinkering with the blog's traditional template style.  Some intensive users found the new format to require excessive scrolling.  So I am tinkering some more-- now with a wider body and Arial typeface. This makes all but the longest posts readable without scrolling. I have also added a "Recent Posts" box at the top of the sidebar to allow you to browse recent post topics without scrolling. Particularly to those who liked the first new template, let me know it this eliminates its advantages for you.  And for those who did not like it, let me know if this is still too much scrolling for you.  By the way, all standard browsers allow you to increase or decrease the size of the print you are reading by zooming in or out.

Split Ohio Supreme Court Upholds Firing Of Science Teacher For Refusing To Remove Religious Materials

In a 4-3 decision today, the Ohio Supreme Court upheld the firing of middle school science teacher John Freshwater for insubordination in failing to comply with orders to remove religious materials from his classroom.  In Freshwater v. Mount Vernon City School District Board of Education, (OH Sup. Ct., Nov. 19, 2013), Chief Justice O'Connor in an opinion joined by Justices French and O'Neill held that the school improperly ordered Freshwater to remove his personal Bible from his desk. The order infringed Freshwater's free exercise rights; the Bible posed no threat of an Establishment Clause violation because Freshwater did not use it while teaching.  However, Freshwater was properly removed for insubordination in failing to comply with orders to remove other religious materials from his classroom.  The Chief Justice added:

Accordingly, based on our  resolution of this threshold issue, we need not reach the constitutional issue of  whether Freshwater impermissibly imposed his religious beliefs in his classroom.

Justice Lanzinger wrote a separate opinion joining only the court's syllabus in the case, saying:

I would hold that the school district’s order that John Freshwater put away his personal Bible while students were present was a reasonable and valid attempt to avoid an Establishment Clause violation. That order did not infringe on Freshwater’s free speech rights, for he was not required to remove the Bible from the classroom—merely putting the book into a desk drawer during class time would have sufficed.

Justice Pfeifer, in a rather blistering dissent, argued that the core of the insubordination charges against Freshwater involved his refusal to remove his personal Bible. Pfeifer agreed with the lead opinion that the order to remove it was improper but disagreed on the handling of the remaining insubordination charges:

With the insubordination claim gutted, the lead opinion should have moved on to consider the constitutional issues remaining in the case. Instead, the majority walks away from the opportunity to provide helpful guidance....

Thus concludes the sorry saga of John Freshwater, excellent junior-high science teacher, terminated as a result of an extreme overreaction of the parents of a decent student, followed by even less informed and measured responses by Mount Vernon school administrators and the school board.... [T]hey have managed to divide a really nice community and cost the school board and/or its insurance providers well over a million dollars to free itself of a very good teacher. And the people they did it for left town. 

There is a clear set of winners today: the lawyers.... They have told themselves that they are participating in the evolved version of the Scopes trial, when in reality they have created a modern Jarndyce and Jarndyce.... 

This court accepted jurisdiction in this case presumably to speak to the important issues of the Establishment Clause, academic freedom, and how schools may approach educating children about the scientific theories of evolution, which may directly clash with religious teachings of creation to which many children have been exposed at home and at church. Instead this court ... [leaves] the resolution of all these heady matters in the hands of a lone referee. Ironically, the lead opinion in this case proves the existence of God. Apparently, he’s an R.C. 3319.16 referee from Shelby.

Justice O'Donnell also filed a dissenting opinion, which was joined by Justices Pfeiffer and Kennedy. He argued that there was insufficient evidence to support the insubordination claim, and that Freshwater was improperly charged with injecting his personal religious beliefs into his teaching:

[T]he evidence in this case reveals that the school board has misinterpreted Freshwater’s effort to challenge students to think critically about evolutionary theory and instead construed his instruction as promoting intelligent design from a creationist perspective. This is a misimpression and contrary to the evidence in this case, and it is not a basis to terminate the contract of a teacher. 

The school board ... apparently assumed that he could not fairly present lessons on evolution and stated that he “not only injected his subjective, biased, Christian religion based, non-scientific opinion into the instruction of eighth grade science students but also gave those students reason to doubt the accuracy and or veracity of scientists, science textbooks, and/or science in general.” Yet student scores on standardized tests stand as strong, persuasive evidence of the board’s faulty conclusion; those scores instead reveal that Freshwater did teach evolution as mandated by the curriculum. Moreover, teaching students to question and rethink accepted scientific theories is essential to their understanding of the scientific method, the key concept his science students learned in eighth grade.

The Supreme Court also issued a lengthy press release on the decision, and the Columbus Dispatch reports on the decision.

Federal Jury Awards Portland City Employee Damages In Religious Harassment Case

In Portland, Oregon, a federal jury earlier this month awarded a former city employee damages of $14,080.  It found in its Nov. 8 special verdict (full text) that plaintiff was subjected to a hostile work environment based on her religion, and that the city knew or should have known about the situation and failed to take prompt effective remedial action.  As reported by yesterday's Oregonian, the complaint (full text) in Griffin v. City of Portland, (D OR, filed 4/9/2013) claimed that co-worker Theresa Lareau harassed plaintiff KellyMarie Griffin about her strong Christian beliefs, repeatedly making profane statements that offended Griffin and telling Griffin: "I’m tired of your Christian attitude and your Christian shit all over your desk and your Christian shit all over the place. I’m going to file a complaint against you the next time I sneeze and you say 'bless you'. You’re just doing it for the attention; you wear it on your sleeve like a badge and I’m sick of it. It offends me."

Court Will Approve Settlement In Class Action By Michigan Muslim Inmates

According to the Wall Street Journal, at a hearing yesterday a Michigan federal court judge indicated he would approve a proposed settlement (full text) in a long-running class-action lawsuit by Muslim prisoners.  Under the settlement in Dowdy-El v. Caruso, (ED MI), the state will provide Muslim inmates meals that comply with halal standards.  The settlement does not require the meals to include meat, and the state says it plans to furnish vegan meals to meet its obligations.  The settlement also provides a procedure for inmates who were disciplined because of conflicts between religious services and work, school or administrative detail assignments to have the record of disciplinary actions expunged.

Catholic Diocese of Gallup Becomes Ninth To File For Bankruptcy Protection

Last week (Nov. 12), the Catholic Diocese of Gallup-- which encompasses parts of New Mexico and Arizona-- became the ninth Catholic diocese in the United States to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization. As reported by the Albuquerque Journal, the diocese includes a large part of the Navajo Nation, as well as 6 other tribes and pueblos. The day before the filing, the diocese posted a letter (full text) from Bishop Wall reiterating a statement he made in September that bankruptcy reorganization is "the only way to equitably and mercifully deal with the mounting sex abuse claims, still meet our commitment to [parishioners] and continue the outreach mission of the Church." Two separate bankruptcy petitions, along with a motion for joint administration of the two cases, were filed in federal bankruptcy court in New Mexico since the diocese is organized through two separate entities-- a New Mexico corporation sole and an Arizona corporation sole.  The full text of all the legal documents involved are available from the Diocese's website. [Thanks to Douglas Carver for the lead.]

Hotel Settles Religious Discrimination Suit With EEOC

The EEOC announced today that the MCM Elegante Hotel in Albuquerque, New Mexico has agreed to settle a religious discrimination suit brought by the EEOC charging that the hotel refused to accommodate a Muslim employee, Safia Abdullah, who was hired for a housekeeping position.  The hotel insisted that Abdullah remove her hijab  (religious head scarf), and fired her when she refused.  Under the settlement, the hotel will pay $100,000 in damages and consent to an injunction baring future discriminatory practices. It will also institute new training and notice procedures.

Former Israeli Chief Rabbi Arrested On Bribery Charges

In Israel, the country's former Chief Ashkenazi Rabbi Yona Metzger was arrested by police today on charges of bribery, money laundering, obstructing an investigation, and fraud.  Haaretz reports that police suspect Metzger, as chief rabbi, took bribes totaling millions of shekels (1 NIS= $0.28 US) from non-profit organizations in exchange for advancing their interests. In June, as Metzger neared the end of his term as chief rabbi, it was initially announced that he was under investigation. (See prior posting).

USCIRF Issues New Policy Brief On Role of Shariah in Sudanese Law

The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom last week issued its most recent Policy Brief, this one titled Sudan’s Enduring Question: The Role of Shari'ah in the Constitution and Law, (Nov. 2013). The Policy Brief says in part:

In December 2010, Sudanese president Omar al-Bashir declared that Sudan’s new constitution will be based on his government’s interpretation of Islamic (Shari’ah) law. Senior officials continue to repeat his declaration, as opposition parties and civil society representatives insist that Sudan’s new constitution be based on universal human rights and reflect Sudan’s commitments to international human rights standards, including freedom of religion or belief.

Concerns about Shari’ah being central to a future constitution ignore the fact that Sudan’s current legal system already is based on a restrictive interpretation of Shari’ah provisions and corresponding hudood, or classes of crimes with set punishments.

Recent Articles, Book and Webcast of Interest

From SSRN:

• Patrick Parkinson, Child Sexual Abuse and the Churches: A Story of Moral Failure?, (Sydney Law School Research Paper No. 13/78, 2013).
• Neil Parpworth, The Succession to the Crown Act 2013: Modernising the Monarchy, (The Modern Law Review, Vol. 76, Issue 6, pp. 1070-1093, 2013).
• Anna Su, Exporting Freedom: Religious Liberty and American Power, (November 2, 2013).
• John Montague, The Law and Financial Transparency in Churches: Reconsidering the Form 990 Exemption, (35 Cardozo Law Review 203 (2013)).
• Chibli Mallat & Mara Revkin, Middle Eastern Law, (Annual Review of Law and Social Science, Vol. 9, pp. 405-433, 2013).
• Daniel L. Chen & Susan Yeh, The Construction of Morals, (Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, Forthcoming).
• Gregory P. Magarian, The New Religious Institutionalism Meets the Old Establishment Clause, (Washington University in St. Louis Legal Studies Research Paper No. 13-11-04, 2013).
• Tracy A. Thomas, Gay Divorce, (U of Akron Legal Studies Research Paper, 2013).
• Sara Rankin, Invidious Deliberation: The Problem of Congressional Bias in Federal Hate Crime Legislation, (Rutgers Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Grace Soyon Lee, Mitigating the Effects of an Economic Downturn on Charitable Contributions: Facing the Problem and Contemplating Solutions, (Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy, Vol. 22, 2013).
• Karim Ginena & Jon M. Truby, Deutsche Bank and the Use of Promises in Islamic Finance Contracts, (Virginia Law & Business Review, 7(4), 620-649, 2013).

From SmartCILP:

• D. Wendy Greene, A Multidimensional Analysis of What Not To Wear In the Workplace: Hijabs and Natural Hair, 8 Florida International University Law Review 333-367 (2013).
• Law of Life. Preface by Alexis Barkis; articles by Bernard Dobranski, Eugene R. Milhizer, Rebekah C. Millard, D. Brian Scarnecchia, Lynn D. Wardle and Susan Yoshihara. 11 Ave Maria Law Review 207-409 (2013). 

Recent Book:

• Sarah Palin, Good Tidings and Great Joy: Protecting the Heart of Christmas, (Harper Collins, Nov. 12, 2013), reviewed by Time.

Webcast of Interest:

• Newseum, Panel Discussion: Restored or Endangered? The State of Free Exercise of Religion in America, (November 07, 2013).

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Smith v. Goord, (2d Cir., Nov. 15, 2013), the 2nd Circuit affirmed dismissal of a Muslim inmate's RLUIPA and equal protection challenges to the lack of Islamic services at a facility where he was held for approximately 4 weeks.

In Awe v. Virginia Department of Corrections, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 161227 (WD VA, Nov. 12, 2013), a Virginia federal district court dismissed an inmate's claim that the Virginia Department of Corrections Common Fare policy requiring inmates to sign an agreement to consent to possible suspension from the diet violates his free exercise and equal protection rights. Plaintiff was suspended for having a fried egg from the master menu in his pocket.

In Gooch v. Georgia Department of Corrections, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160882 (MD GA, Nov. 12, 2013), a Georgia federal district court adopted in part a magistrate's recommendation (2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 161630, Sept. 18, 2013) and permitted an inmate to proceed against various defendants on his claim that they  failed to provide him with a specific diet required by his religion.

In Hall v. Bradshaw, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 162284 (WD NC, Nov. 14, 2013), a North Carolina federal district court dismissed an inmate's claim that his request for a Native American bible was denied.

President Announces Nominee For Assistant Attorney General For Civil Rights

Last Thursday, President Obama announced his intention to nominate Debo P. Adegbile as Assistant Attorney General to head the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice.  The Civil Rights Division enforces federal anti-discrimination laws, including those that prohibit religious discrimination.  The nominee has served since July as Senior Counsel to the United States Senate Judiciary Committee, and before that worked at the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund.

NYPD's Grooming Rule Violates Free Exercise Rights of Orthodox Jewish Officer

In Litzman v. New York City Police Department, (SD NY, Nov. 15, 2013), Fishel Litzman, a member of the Chabad Lubavitch Orthodox Jewish movement, was accepted into the NYPD Police Academy and sworn in as a probationary police officer. He sued when his request for a religious accommodation to allow him to wear a one-inch long beard was denied and he was fired for continuing to wear his beard. NYPD policy allowed for medical and religious exceptions to the Department's no-beard rule, but only for beards that do not exceed one millimeter in length. A New York federal district court held that while the police department had not violated Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act by failing to accommodate Litzman's religious exercise, it did violate his 1st Amendment free exercise rights and the New York City Human Rights Law.

The NYPD prevailed under Title VII because it carried its burden of showing that an accommodation would create "undue hardship." The New York City Human Rights Law similarly requires accommodation, but has a definition of "undue hardship" that creates a much higher hurdle for the employer.  NYPD failed to meet that test. Analyzing plaintiff's 1st Amendment free exercise claim, the court concluded that strict scrutiny should be applied:

Here, the undisputed record demonstrates that de facto exemptions to the one-millimeter rule abound. The ... NYPD provides temporary exemptions to police officers who grow beards beyond the one-millimeter limit for special occasions, such as religious holidays, weddings, and funerals.... Defendants also admit that the NYPD has police officers with beards in excess of one-millimeter in length, not only because of formal exemptions due to undercover assignments, but also because the NYPD does not always enforce its personal appearance standards....  Because there is evidence that the NYPD exercises discretion with respect to a facially neutral rule in a discriminatory fashion, strict scrutiny is appropriate.

New York Daily News reports on the decision.

Obama Sends Greetings To Sikhs Celebrating Birthday of First Sikh Guru

Yesterday, President Obama issued a statement (full text) extending best wishes to Sikhs in the United States and around the world as they celebrate the anniversary of the birth of Guru Nanak Dev Ji, the first Sikh Guru.  The statement says in part:

This sacred time is an occasion to reflect on Guru Nanak’s timeless teachings and the principles that are at the heart of Sikhism, including the equality of all human beings, the pluralism we cherish in diverse societies and the compassion we owe one another.  

Note To Readers On Template Redesign

I have done a bit of a redesign on the template for Religion Clause blog, hopefully to make it more readable.  I invite comments on whether it has succeeded.

Panelists Lament Loss of Experience At IRS Exempt Organizations Unit

Yesterday's BNA Daily Report for Executives [subscription required] reports on a Nov. 15 conference on tax exempt organizations sponsored by the American Law Institute and American Bar Association at which speakers lamented the current situation in the Internal Revenue Service's Exempt Organizations unit. Here are some excerpts from the BNA report:

Most of the senior IRS officials who worked in the unit have either retired or been pushed out as a result of the May Tea Party scandal, said Marc Owens, a partner with Caplin & Drysdale.... “Everyone from the commissioner down to the director of rulings and agreements in the exempt organizations function were replaced by people with essentially no tax administration experience,” he said. “No experience interpreting the Internal Revenue Code, no experience dealing with taxpayers that apply the code, no experience in doing what the exempt organizations function has done and is in charge of doing.”... One of the impacts of less-experienced employees in recent years has been a dwindling number of technical advice memorandums, the panelists said. TAMs move audit cases to the IRS's national office.... 

Private Foundation That Funds Milwaukee Archdiocese Is Respondent In Securities Fraud Case Supreme Court Agrees To Review

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Halliburton Co. v. Erica P. John Fund, (Docket No. 13-317, cert. granted 11/15/2013). (Order List.) This is the second time the case is before the Supreme Court. (The Court's 2011 opinion was Erica P. John Fund, Inc. v. Halliburton.) Reports on yesterday's decision by the Court to grant review, such as this report by Reuters, all focus on the main issue involved-- whether the Court will back off of the so-called "fraud-on-the-market theory" that makes it easier for securities fraud class actions to be brought in federal court.  What few, if any, media are reporting is that the plaintiff-appellee, the Erica P. John Fund, was previously known as the Archdiocese of Milwaukee Supporting Fund.  In recent years it has donated some $600,000 per year to the Catholic Archdiocese-- which is now in bankruptcy reorganization. Here are excerpts from a somewhat unflattering March 2011 report about the Fund by the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel:

The nonprofit Erica P. John Fund, which has given millions of dollars to the archdiocese and other organizations over the years, is among a number of revenue sources expected to be scrutinized by creditors in the archdiocese's bankruptcy.

Victims and their attorneys question the timing of the name change in 2009, suggesting it may have been intended to obscure the fund's true purpose - to financially support the archdiocese - and may have been part of a broader effort by the archdiocese to shield its resources from being used for sex abuse claims....

Archdiocese spokesman Jerry Topczewski said the John Fund, as a private foundation, cannot be tapped to pay sex church abuse settlements and that its grants obtained by the archdiocese are restricted to specific uses....

Proceeds from the fund - more specifically, from the sale of a property it donated - were used to pay $450,000 in hush money in 1998 to a man who claimed to have been sexually assaulted by then-Archbishop Rembert Weakland when he was a seminary student years earlier. Weakland, who abruptly retired after the payment became public in 2002, has maintained that the relationship was consensual.

[An Archdiocese spokesman] said the building was donated before Erica John dictated that no family funds could be used to pay sex-abuse settlements. And federal authorities investigated the allocation but found no wrongdoing by the archdiocese because the money had not been diverted from a specific purpose.

Wrongful Death Suit Filed Against Philadelphia Catholic Archdiocese and Two Priests

The Legal Intelligencer reports that a wrongful death lawsuit was filed last Wednesday in a Pennsylvania state trial court against the Catholic Archdiocese of Philadelphia, Monsignor William Lynn and Rev. Robert L. Brennan.  At issue is the death of Sean Patrick McIlmail who last month was found dead in his car from a drug overdose. The suit alleges that McIlmail, who was addicted to drugs, suffered psychologically and emotionally as a result of sexual abuse by Brennan, and that McIlmail developed "various psychological coping mechanisms" in order to deal with the trauma. The suit claims that the Archdiocese and Msgr. Lynn "protected Brennan in his position so as to facilitate his sexual abuse of children...." Criminal charges against Brennan were dropped after McIlmail's death. A jury had previously deadlocked on criminal charges against Brennan.  Lynn was convicted last year of child endangerment for covering up sexual abuse by other priests. (See prior posting.)

Supreme Court In Unusual Move Gives Interim Relief On Grooming Rules To Muslim Prisoner

In an unusual order (full text) yesterday, the United States Supreme Court issued an injunction barring the Arkansas Department of Corrections from enforcing its grooming policy against Muslim inmate Gregory Holt "to the extent that it prohibits applicant from growing a one-half-inch beard in accordance with his religious beliefs."  The order entered in the case of Holt v. Hobbs, (Docket No. 13-6827) will terminate either when the Court denies Holt's petition for certiorari, or, if it grants the petition, when the Court enters its judgment. AP reports that Holt is serving a life sentence for domestic violence and burglary after he cut his girlfriend's throat and stabbed her. Holt, who also goes by his religious name of Abdul Maalik Muhammad, is appearing pro se.  He filed his handwritten application for an injunction while his cert. petition is pending with Justice Samuel Alito (who is assigned to receive such motions in 8th Circuit cases). Alito in turn referred the application to the entire court which issued yesterday's order. Here is the 8th Circuit's opinion upholding the prison system's grooming policy. [Thanks to How Appealing for the lead.]

5th Circuit Remands Sikh's RFRA Challenge To Ban On Kirpan In Federal Building

In Tagore v. United States, (5th Cir., Nov. 13, 2013), the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a Title VII religious discrimination claim by a Sikh employee of the Internal Revenue Service who lost her job after she insisted on wearing her kirpan into her federal office building. Federal law (18 USC Sec. 930) prohibits weapons with blades over 2.5 inches long in federal building. The court said that: "An employer need not accommodate an employee’s religious practice by violating other laws."

However the court remanded for reconsideration of plaintiff's RFRA claim in light of a Policy Directive issued by the Federal Protective Service after the case concluded in the district court. (See prior posting.) That Directive permits granting of exemptions in federal buildings for Sikh articles of faith, and thus possibly undercuts the government's argument regarding the need for uniform application of the weapons ban.  The appeals court also held that, contrary to the district court's conclusion, plaintiff had created a genuine issue of material fact as to her sincere religious belief in wearing a 3-inch bladed kirpan.  [Thanks to Blog From the Capital for the lead.]

Hawaii Court Upholds State's New Marriage Equality Law

In Hawaii, a trial court judge rejected a state constitutional challenge to the Hawaii's marriage equality law that was signed by the governor yesterday. According to the Honolulu Star-Advertiser, Circuit Court Judge Karl Sakamoto held yesterday that the legislature has the inherent authority to define marriage. In 1998, Hawaii voters approved an anti-gay marriage constitutional amendment.  But unlike amendments in a number of other states, Hawaii's Art. I, Sec. 23 merely permits the state legislature to reserve marriage to opposite sex couples. Plaintiffs in the case, including a state representative, a Christian pastor and the head of Hawaii's Christian Coalition argued that in the 1998 amendment, voters intended to ban same-sex marriage. The court rejected this argument.

Suit Settled Allowing Christian Group To Use Building To House Recovering Addicts and Their Children

Alliance Defending Freedom announced this week that it has reached a settlement with the city of Hattiesburg, Mississippi in a suit challenging the city's refusal to rezone or provide a special use permit for a Christian organization to use a building it purchased for overnight housing of women who are recovering from addiction and their children. The complaint (full text) in Lighthouse Rescue Mission, Inc. v. City of Hattiesburg, Mississippi, (SD MI, filed 5/3/2013) claimed that the zoning denials violated RLUIPA, the federal Fair Housing Act and the speech and religion protections in the federal and state constitutions. The order and settlement agreement (full text, filed 11/7/13) permits Rescue Mission to house allows it to use the building for overnight housing and related ministry operations.

Developments In Challenges To Contraceptive Coverage Mandate

On Tuesday, a petition for certiorari (full text) was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in Eden Foods Inc. v. Sebeius, (cert. filed 11/12/2013).  In the case, the 6th Circuit Court denied a preliminary injunction to a for-profit natural foods corporation and its Catholic owners who claim that the contraceptive coverage mandate under the Affordable Care Act violates their free exercise rights as protected by the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. (See prior posting.) Thomas More Law Center announced the filing of the cert. petition.

In June (see prior posting), a Pennsylvania federal district court granted Geneva College a preliminary injunction pending a decision on the merits in its challenge to the requirement that it include in its student health plans coverage for contraceptives that it considers abortifacients. As reported by BNA Daily Report for Executives [subscription required], the Christian college has now filed a motion and supporting Memorandum of Law (full text) seeking a similar preliminary injunction for the health plan covering its employees. The case is Geneva College v. Sebelius, (WD PA, motion filed 11/12/2013).

Court Invalidates Couple's Agreement Negotiated Before Bet Din For Lack of Formalities

In Katz v. Katz, (S.Ct. Kings Co. NY, Nov. 7, 2013), a New York trial court held that an agreement negotiated before a Jewish rabbinical court (Bet Din) by a husband and wife is unenforceable because it was not formally acknowledged in the manner required by NY Domestic Relations Law Sec. 236B(3).  As described by the court, the wife argued that she:

was a "victim of extortion" in the sum of $70,000.00 in order to obtain a get, a Jewish divorce, from the husband....  [She] alleges that she only conceded to joint custody and to the parenting access schedule detailed in the May 17, 2010 writing because she "was intimidated to give in to the Defendant's unreasonable demands of custody, visitation and holidays" and that she believed that the husband would not grant her a get [a religious divorce] unless she did so.... She alleges that she placed $50,000.00 in escrow to "guarantee performance" that the husband would grant her a get and that she has "not received [the escrow] money and believes that it has been given to the Defendant, and that he is using [her escrow] money to support this litigation."

The husband denies that the wife was a victim in process of obtaining the get and alleges ... that if the wife "did not agree with the tenets of the Jewish Law and Torah or felt that the process was unfair to her, she did not have to go through the Get process" and that it is "disingenuous of her to receive the benefit of the Get and then attack the Jewish Law and Torah under which it was issued." He "categorically" denies the he received any money from the wife in exchange for him granting her a get. The husband alleges that it is he, not the wife, who is being victimized in this litigation: he alleges that "[i]t is only because [he] did not think [the son] should be traveling to Israel, that [the wife] is now retaliating against [him] by trying to take away what [he] value [sic] most in life — custody of [his] son."

Norway's Government Will Propose New Law On Ritual Circumcision

Norway's health minister Brent Hoie says that by this spring the government will introduce new legislation on non-medical circumcision of boys under 18. Each year some 2000 Muslim and 7 Jewish newborns are circumcised in Norway. According to the Jerusalem Post yesterday, the announcement follows a recommendation by Norway's Children’s Ombudswoman Anne Lindboe to completely ban non-medical circumcision of boys under 18 without their consent. Lindboe said: "This is not due to any lack of understanding of minorities or religious traditions, but because the procedure is irreversible, painful and risky."  It is not clear what the proposed bill will provide.

Jewish Leaders Criticize Bush 43's Decision To Speak At Messianic Jewish Fundraiser

CNN reports that Tevi Troy, George W. Bush's former Liaison to the Jewish Community is critical of the former president's decision to speak tonight at the fundraising dinner of the Messianic Jewish Bible Institute, a group whose goal is to convert Jews to Christianity.  CBS reports that other Jewish leaders such as ADL director Abe Foxman and Los Angeles rabbi David Wolpe have also spoken out against President Bush's decision. MJBI's website says:

The vision of the MJBI is to bring Jewish people into a personal relationship of faith with Yeshua the Messiah, knowing their acceptance will eventually mean life from the dead (Romans 11:15).

Appeals Court Dismisses Failure To Supervise Suit Against Diocese By Abuse Victim

In D.T. v.Catholic Diocese of Kansas City- St. Joseph, (MO App., Nov. 12, 2013), a Missouri state appeals court upheld the dismissal of claims against a Catholic diocese by plaintiff who was sexually abused by a priest serving in one of its parishes. The suit alleges that that the Diocese knew that the priest had sexually molested children in the past and knew that it was substantially certain that he would molest other children in the future.  Relying on the Missouri Supreme court's 1997 decision in Gibson v. Brewer, the appeals court held that negligence-based claims against the diocese are barred by the First Amendment because deciding them leads to excessive entanglement.  It also, reluctantly, dismissed the claims of intentional failure to supervise clergy because under Gibson, a diocese could be held liable in such cases only when the abuse occurred on property belonging to the diocese. The appeals court said it is bound by the state Supreme Court precedent, despite the questionable outcome it produces in this case:

Taken to its extreme, then, a religious organization could be fully cognizant that a member of its clergy, when placed near children, is certain or substantially certain to sexually molest children; but as long as it counsels its clergy to take their personal criminal proclivities to premises not owned, possessed, or controlled by the church and not to use a chattel of the church in the commission of the harmful and often criminal actions, there could be no civil liability for intentional failure to supervise. 

That result seems to contradict the spirit and intent of the intentional tort recognized and announced by the Gibson court.... Perhaps this is a case that our Supreme Court may wish to accept on transfer to clarify application of the elements of the tort of intentional failure to supervise clergy that it previously announced in Gibson, particularly in light of the fact that both the Restatements (Second) of Agency and Torts have been revised since Gibson was decided.

AP reports on the decision.

Nevada Supreme Court Stays Out of Dispute Over Judge's Recusal For Religious Ties

On Nov. 8, the Nevada Supreme Court denied a Petition for Writ of Mandamus or Prohibition in Health Plan of Nevada v. District Court (Lynam).  As reported by the Las Vegas Review-Journal, in the case the Health Plan of Nevada was attempting to get the court to order trial court judge Douglas Smith back on a case in which Smith had recused himself.  In the case in which plaintiffs are suing over contracting hepatitis C from a doctor covered by the Health Plan HMO, the judge stepped out after plaintiffs claimed that the attorney representing the HMO held a position of authority over the judge in the Mormon Church.  The attorney,  Mark Hutchison (a state senator and candidate for lieutenant governor) was one of two counselors to the president of Red Rock Stake (one of the 38 districts into which the Mormon Church in Nevada is divided). The judge served as a counselor to the bishop of one of the congregations in Red Rock Stake. Health Plan argued that Hutchison had no direct authority over Judge Smith in the Church, and in any event Hutchison has now withdrawn from representing Health Plan so the conflict is eliminated.

Snake Handling Pastor Charged Criminally; Authorities Tipped Off By Reality TV Show

RNS reported yesterday that the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency last week raided the Tabernacle Church of God in LaFollete, Tennessee and seized 53 venomous snakes handled by the congregation during worship services. Authorities arrested the church's pastor, Rev. Andrew Hamblin, who is the co-star of the National Geographic Chanel's reality series Snake Salvation.  Wildlife authorities were tipped off to the fact that there were snakes at the church because of the television show. Hamblin was charged with violations of Tennessee Code § 39-17-101 which prohibits using a poisonous snake in a way that endangers others. Hamblin says that the ban violates his and his congregation's religious liberty. They point to language in Mark 16: 18 to explain their snake handling rituals.

Hawaii Legislature Passes Marriage Equality Bill

Yesterday the Hawaii legislature gave final passage to SB1, the Hawaii Marriage Equality Act which will legalize same-sex marriage as of Dec. 2. One of the 19 representatives voting against the bill in the House was Rep. Jo Jordan, the first openly gay state legislator to vote against same-sex marriage.  She told Honolulu Magazine that her objections were in part based on a concern that the religious exemptions in the bill are too narrow.  The bill protects clergy who refuse to perform same-sex marriages or civil unions, and allows any religious organization or nonprofit that is "operated, supervised, or controlled by a religious organization" to refuse to provide goods, services or facilities for civil unions or marriages that are in violation of the organization's religious beliefs. According to the Honolulu Star-Advertiser, Gov. Neil Abercrombie has said he will sign the bill.  It is expected that he will do so today, beating Illinois to become the 15th state to legalize same-sex marriage.  The Illinois legislature passed marriage equality legislation last week (see prior posting), but Gov. Pat Quinn does not plan to sign it until Nov. 20. Shortly after the bill passed in Hawaii, President Obama issued a statement congratulating the legislature on its action, and saying that this made him even prouder to have been born in Hawaii.

U.S. Bishops Elect New Leaders; Focus On Christian Persecution Abroad

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops began their Fall meeting in Baltimore yesterday.  As reported by CNS and the New York Times, outgoing USCCB president Cardinal Timothy Dolan in his address to fellow-bishops called for a new emphasis on combating persecution of Christians in countries such as Syria, Egypt, India and Nigeria. He said that we are living in what must be recognized as a new age of martyrs.  He claimed that as many as 1 million Christians have been killed for their faith so far in the 21st century, and said that it is a priority to urge political leaders to make the protection of "at-risk Christians a foreign policy priority."

The bishops elected their current vice-president, Archbishop Joseph E. Kurtz of Louisville, Kentucky, as the new president of the Conference, and elected Cardinal Daniel N. DiNardo of Galveston-Houston as vice president. (Press release.) (AP report.)  They also approved the drafting of a formal statement on pornography.

International Court of Justice Rules On Cambodian- Thailand Dispute Over Hindu Temple Site

Yesterday the International Court of Justice in the Hague issued a decision in Request for Interpretation of the Judgment of 15 June 1962 in the Case Concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear (Cambodia v. Thailand). (Full text of decision; Summary of the judgment; Press Release).  In 1962, the ICJ ruled in a border dispute that the Temple of Preah Vihear (now a UNESCO world heritage site) is located in Cambodian territory, and ordered that "Thailand is under an obligation to withdraw any military or police forces, or other guards or keepers, stationed by her at the Temple, or in its vicinity."  Yesterday's decision clarified what was meant by the area in the "vicinity" of the Temple. As described in a Voice of America report:

The unanimous ruling by the 17 judges of the world court says all of the raised land on which the ancient Khmer Hindu temple sits belongs to Cambodia.... While adjusting some of the disputed boundary, the decision leaves unresolved the sovereignty of much of the 4.6 square kilometer area in the immediate vicinity of the religious site.....

The ICJ decision rejects some territorial claims in the area made by each country thus it is not a total victory for either side.....

Within hours of the verdict, Thailand’s Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra appeared in a nationally televised address, saying the court had taken her country’s stance into consideration and that Bangkok should work with Phnom Penh to resolve outstanding issues.

The territorial dispute led to an exchange of gunfire and dozens of deaths in 2011.

Consent Order Requires Priest Charged With Sexual Misconduct To Petition Vatican For Removal From Priesthood

Bergen County, New Jersey prosecutor John L. Molinelli issued a press release last week announcing an unusual resolution in a clergy sex abuse case.  As explained by an RNS report yesterday, in 2007 Catholic priest Michael Fugee, in order to avoid a retrial on improper sexual conduct charges, signed an agreement, embodied in a judicial order and Memorandum of Understanding, banning him from ministering to children.  It was discovered earlier this year that Fugee violated the agreement by attending youth retreats and hearing confessions from teens.  In response, in May he was charged with 5 counts of criminal contempt.  On November 1, those charges were disposed of through a binding agreement and court order under which Fugee has agreed to petition the Vatican to remove him permanently from the priesthood.  Prosecutor Molinelli said that this result could not have been achieved by a contempt conviction because:

it is not believed that the American Justice System has such authority as a condition of probation or upon conviction. This is a requirement that will eliminate the threat of Michael Fugee, ever again, obtaining the trust of people through his clerical position nor using his ordained position as a Priest to exert improper contact with children.... The agreement that has been reached forever bars Michael Fugee from holding himself out as a current or former priest or spiritual advisor. Most importantly, he is prohibited from working with children in any capacity. 

Molinelli also emphasized that this new order will be supervised by the prosecutor's office, and not by the Archdiocese of Newark, in which Molinelli has lost confidence.

UPDATE: Here is the full text of the court's order in State of New Jersey v. Fugee, (NJ Super. Ct., Nov. 1, 2013).

Charter Affirming State Secularism Introduced Into Quebec Legislature

As previously reported, in August the ruling Parti Quebecois government in the Canadian province of Quebec announced its intention to introduce a secularist Charter of Quebec Values into the National Assembly.  Last Thursday it did so by introducing Bill 60, (full text) titled Charter Affirming the Values of State Secularism and Religious Neutrality and of Equality Between Women and Men, and Providing a Framework for Accommodation Requests.  Here is an excerpt from the Explanatory Notes summarizing the most important provisions of the bill:

Public bodies must, in the pursuit of their mission, remain neutral in religious matters and reflect the secular nature of the State. Accordingly, obligations are set out for personnel members of public bodies in the exercise of their functions, including a duty to remain neutral and exercise reserve in religious matters by, among other things, complying with the restriction on wearing religious objects that overtly indicate a religious affiliation. As well, personnel members of a public body must exercise their functions with their face uncovered, and persons to whom they provide services must also have their face uncovered when receiving such services.  The same rules apply to other persons, in particular to persons who exercise judicial functions, or adjudicative functions within the administrative branch, and to personnel members of the National Assembly.

Canadian Jewish Press reports on the concerns that various Jewish organizations have about the bill, including Section 38 that would allow the National Assembly to bar its members from wearing religious symbols.

Endorsing Agency For Two Conservative Chaplains Sues VA Over Pastoral Education Program Clashes

Fox News and Breibart News report  on a federal lawsuit filed last week by the endorsing agency for two military chaplains who were forced out of a Clinical Pastoral Education program run by the Department of Veterans Affairs in San Diego. The program is required in order to work as a chaplain in a VA hospital. The two chaplains, who were endorsed by the Conservative Baptist Association of America, continually clashed in class with the religiously liberal instructor, Nancy Dietsch.  The complaint (full text) in Conservative Baptist Association of America, Inc. v. Shenseki, (D DC, filed 11/8/2013), sets out examples of in-class exchanges between Dietsch and chaplains Steven Firtko and Dan Klender, among which are:

... Dietsch informed the class she believes God could be a man or woman. Chaplain Firtko recited the Lord’s Prayer, stating “Our Father who Art in Heaven.” In response, Ms. Dietsch angrily pounded her fist on the table and shouted: “Do not quote Scripture in this class!”....

When Chaplain Klender responded to a question during a group discussion regarding the Sandy Hook school shooting in Newtown CT, by stating he would tell a parent whose child was a victim by stating that “there is evil in the world,” Ms. Dietsch impugned his core faith beliefs stating they would not work in a clinical setting. In the presence of the other students she said: “You don’t actually believe that do you?”

Dietsch also told the class that The VA and she "do not allow Chaplains to pray 'in Jesus' name' in public ceremonies."

The lawsuit contends that the program's intolerance of mainstream Judeo-Christian beliefs violates RFRA, the 1st Amendment's Free Exercise and Free Speech clauses. It also contends that discrimination against Conservative Baptist Association chaplains was arbitrary and capricious.

In a statement to news media, the VA said that the two chaplains were "bullying other classmates and refusing to honor other faith groups." [Corrected to make clear that plaintiff is the endorsing agency, not the chaplains. Thanks to God and Country blog.]

Supreme Court Review Sought By Photographer Who Refused Employment For Same-Sex Wedding

A petition for certiorari (full text) was filed Friday with the U.S. Supreme Court in Elane Photography, LLC v. Willock. In the case, the New Mexico Supreme Court held that the state's Human Rights Act requires a commercial photography business to serve same-sex couples on the same basis as opposite-sex couples, and that the 1st Amendment does not require an exception for creative or expressive professions. (See prior posting.) The cert. petition frames the Question Presented as:

Whether applying a state public-accommodations statute to require a photographer to create expressive images and picture-books conveying messages that conflict with her religious beliefs violates the First Amendment’s ban on compelled speech.

ADF issued a press release announcing the filing of the petition.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Arshad Zaman, Maulana Sayyid Sulaiman Nadvi on Law, Politics, and Government, in Islam, (November 1, 2013).
• Scott D. Gerber, Law and the Lively Experiment in Colonial Rhode Island, (2 British Journal of American Legal Studies 453 (2013)).
• Zachary R. Calo, Review of 'The Tragedy of Religious Freedom' by Marc O. Degirolami, (Religion and Human Rights 8 (2013)).
• Nora Abdul Hak & Hanna Ambaras Khan, The Application of Sulh in Resolving Community Disputes, (Paper presentation at in 1st World Congress on Integration and Islamicisation of Acquired Human Knowledge (FWCII-2013)).
• Susannah William Pollvogt, United States v. Windsor and the Crisis in Equal Protection Jurisprudence, (November 6, 2013).
• David B. Cruz, 'Amorphous Federalism' and the Supreme Court's Marriage Cases, (Loyola Law Review, Supreme Court Issue, Forthcoming).

From SmartCILP:

• Shahla Haeri, No End in Sight: Politics, Paradox, and Gender Policies in Iran, 93 Boston University Law Review 1049-1062 (2013).
• Pnina Lahav, Israel's Rosit the Riveter: Between Secular Law and Jewish Law, 93 Boston University Law Review 1063-1083 (2013).

The Episcopal Church Sues Break-Away Illinois Diocese Over Property

The Episcopal Diocese of Chicago and The Episcopal Church last week filed a state court lawsuit claiming that property held by or for parishes and missions of the break-away Anglican Diocese of Quincy may only be used for the benefit of The Episcopal Church. (Press release). The complaint (full text) in The Episcopal Church v. Morales, (IL Cir Ct., filed 11/6/2013), seeks a declaratory judgment that the individual defendants do not hold any offices in the Episcopal Diocese of Quincy and that the parishes and missions are controlled by clergy and officers appointed or elected by The Episcopal Church.  In a case decided earlier this year, Diocese of Quincy v. The Episcopal Church, (IL Cir. Ct., Sept. 9, 2013), a different state trial court held that the break-away Anglican Diocese holds title to the bank account and administrative offices of the Diocese. The court held that the Dennis Canon on which The Episcopal Church in part relied relates to parish or mission properties and not to properties titled in the name of the Diocese. Anglican Curmudgeon blog discusses the background and strongly criticizes the Diocese of Chicago for the suit filed last week.

Court Rejects Challenges To New Jersey Ban On Conversion Therapy for Minors

In King v. Christie, (D NJ, Nov. 8, 2013), a New Jersey federal district court dismissed a challenge to the state's ban on sexual-orientation change therapy for minors.  It held that psychotherapy carried out through talk therapy is not speech under the 1st Amendment.  Instead it is conduct.  In so holding, the court in part pointed to the 9th Circuit's recent decision upholding a similar California statute. The court went on to reject claims that the New Jersey statute is overbroad and vague.  Finally the court rejected the claim that the New Jersey statute violates the Free Exercise clause by preventing mental health providers from exercising their sincerely held religious beliefs that changing same-sex attraction or behavior is possible. The court concluded that the statute is a neutral law of general applicability. The Newark Star Ledger reports on the decision.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Whitaker v. Whitener, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157692 (WD NC, Nov. 1, 2013), a North Carolina federal district court dismissed without prejudice a complaint by a Jewish prisoner that serving his kosher meals cold, or late, or delivering them along with non-kosher meals violates his free exercise rights.

In Barton v. Snaza, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157934 (WD WA, Nov. 4,2013), a Washington federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157937, Oct. 4, 2013) and dismissed without prejudice prior to service for failure to state a claim an inmate's complaint that  two of his personal Asatru/Odinist books were confiscated by an unidentified person, preventing him from performing a ceremonial rite in his cell for three different holidays.

In Arrendondo v. Brooks, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 158406 (D NV, Nov. 5, 2013), a Nevada federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 158403, Sept. 23, 2013) and dismissed an inmate's complaint that several of his religious books were confiscated as contraband because he did not have his name written in them.

In White v. Van Leer, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159186 (ED CA, Nov. 5, 2013), a California federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing a Muslim inmate's complaint that he was denied kosher meals in place of the vegetarian substitute meals served at breakfast and lunch to those receiving Halal diets.

In Medina v. Snyder, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159225 (ED CA, Nov 5, 2013), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed,with leave to amend, an inmate's complaint that he was denied a kosher meal on three separate occasions.

In George v. City of New York, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159434 (SD NY, Nov. 6, 2013), a New York federal district court dismissed a Muslim inmate's claim that a strip search of him violated his free exercise rights. His request to be searched in private was refused.

In West v. Grams, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160003 (WD WI, Nov. 8, 2013), a Wisconsin federal magistrate judge dismissed complaints by a Muslim inmate that Muslim prayer services were not permitted to be held when a volunteer leader from outside the prison was unavailable. The court also dismissed his claim that Ramadan meals were served as late as possible in retaliation for his arguing about the proper time to serve these meals.

In McKenzie v. Michigan Department of Corrections, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159981 (WD MI, Nov. 8, 2013), a Michigan federal district court dismissed a suit brought by several Jewish prisoners complaining about a change in Department of Corrections policy that eliminated separate kosher meals and instead made vegan meals that meet kosher and halal standards available for religious diets.

In Arafat v. U.S. Department of Justice, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160075 (D MN, Nov. 8, 2013), a Muslim inmate complained of a lack of a halal-certified diet at the county jail in which he was held while his federal criminal trial was under way.  A Minnesota federal district court dismissed most of his claims but allowed him to proceed with his claim for injunctive relief, subject to its being dismissed as moot as soon as his sentencing hearing was completed and he was transferred back to federal prison where a halal diet was available. UPDATE: The magistrate's recommendation in the case is at Wetsch v. U.S. Department of Justice, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160407 (Aug.  22, 2013).

Federal Lawsuit Challenges Idaho's Refusal To Permit or Recognize Same-Sex Marriage

A suit was filed Friday in an Idaho federal district court challenging the constitutionality of Idaho's laws that exclude same-sex couples from marrying in the state, and refuse to recognize marriages of same-sex couples entered into lawfully elsewhere.  The complaint (full text) in Latta v. Otter, (D ID, filed 11/8/2013), claims that Idaho Const. art. III, § 28 and Idaho Code §§ 32-201 and 32-209 violate the due process and equal protection clauses of the 14th Amendment. The National Center for Lesbian Rights issued a press release on the case. [Thanks to Alliance Alert for the lead.]