British Court Uses Anti-Social Behavior Orders Against Islamic Radicals

Britain's Crime and Disorder Act 1998, Sec. 1, permits courts to issue an Anti-Social Behavior Order (ASBO) against anyone who has acted "in a manner that caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to one or more persons..." Friday's London Mirror and Mail Online report on the innovative use of this power against Islamic radicals in London. Three Muslim men who have been acting as a vigilante Muslim Patrol to enforce Sharia norms in East London received 5-year ASOBs last Friday barring them from making unsolicited approaches to people to promote Sharia law.  The ringleader of the 3, Jordan Horner, also had restrictions placed on him designed to prevent him from preaching extremist Islamic views.  He is prohibited from possessing a bullhorn in any public place, and barred from entering any place of education unless as a student or to visiting relatives. The men are also prohibited from meeting with each other, as well as with a fourth named person or with controversial Islamist Anjem Choudary.

Illegal Kosher Slaughtering Reportedly Continuing In Poland

As previously reported, in Poland a 2012 court decision which Parliament refused to reverse effectively banned kosher and halal slaughter by eliminating an exemption from the requirement that animals be stunned before they are killed.  Previously some $400 million per year of kosher and halal meat exports had benefited the Polish economy.  JTA reported this week, however, that kosher slaughtering is continuing in three Polish slaughterhouses. The firms are certifying to the government that the animals are stunned before slaughter, a representation that is false if the requirements for kosher slaughtering have been met.  Poland's chief rabbi has suspended an aide who was responsible for the misrepresentations, pending an investigation.

Uzbekistan Issues Decree Regulating Religious Materials

Forum 18 (Feb. 12) and Ferghana (Jan. 28) report on a decree issued recently by the government of Uzbekistan that creates a formal legal basis for its restrictions on religious materials.  Supplementing the 1998 Law on Freedom of Religion or Belief (full text of 1998 law .pdf file), the decree titled “Measures to improve order in the production, import and distribution of religious materials,” was signed by the Prime Minister on Jan. 20 and came into formal effect on Jan. 27. It allows distribution of religious materials only at commercial points of sale equipped with cash registers. Advance permission is needed to import religious materials. No more than 3 copies of even approved publications may be imported for personal use.  The production, storage or distribution of materials intended to encourage people to change their beliefs or which "distort religious canons" are prohibited.

Federal District Court Strikes Down Virginia's Ban on Same-Sex Marriages; Delays Injunction To Allow Appeal

Yesterday in Bostic v. Rainey, (ED VA, Feb. 13, 2014), a Virginia federal district court concluded that Virginia's constitutional and statutory provisions that bar same-sex marriage and prohibit recognition of lawful same-sex marriages performed elsewhere are unconstitutional under the due process and equal protection clauses of the 14th Amendment:

The Court is compelled to conclude that Virginia's Marriage Laws unconstitutionally deny Virginia's gay and lesbian citizens the fundamental freedom to choose to marry.  Government interests in perpetuating traditions, shielding state matters from federal interference, and favoring one model of parenting over others must yield to this country's cherished protections that ensure the exercise of the private choices of the individual citizen regarding love and family.

The court began its opinion with a quotation from Mildred Loving, one of the plaintiffs in the 1967 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Loving v. Virginia that struck down Virginia's laws barring interracial marriage and established the modern doctrine of marriage as a "fundamental right." However the court yesterday also stayed the effectiveness of its preliminary injunction to give the parties time to appeal its decision to the 4th Circuit. Washington Post reports on yesterday's decision.

UPDATE: An amended opinion (full text) was issued on Feb. 14 correcting a reference in the first paragraph of Judge Allen's opinion.  The sentence that originally read: "Our Constitution declares that "all men" are created
equal." was corrected to read: "Our Declaration of Independence recognizes that "all men" are created equal." Politico reports on the change. [Thanks to Mirror of Justice for the lead.]

Hawaiian Church Settles Qui Tam Action Charging It With Underpaying School System

AP reports that New Hope churches, one of the original defendants in a Hawaii qui tam whistle blower lawsuit, has agreed to settle for $775,000. However it will not admit wrongdoing as part of the settlement.  As previously reported, in State of Hawaii ex rel. Kahle and Huber v. New Hope International Ministries, (HI Cir. Ct., filed 3/22/2013), relators claim that  churches submitted false records and statements to deprive Hawaii schools of $5.6 million in unpaid or underpaid rent and utility charges for weekend use of school buildings, parking lots and facilities. Under the settlement, $200,000 will go to the relators who are responsible for the suit being filed, with the remainder going to the school system.

New Danish Administrative Regulation Prohibits Kosher and Halal Slaughter Without Prior Stunning of Animal

World Jewish Congress reported yesterday that Denmark's Agriculture and Food Minister has signed a new regulation that takes effect Feb. 17  requiring all animal slaughter to be carried out with prior stunning. Traditionally both kosher and halal slaughter prohibits prior stunning of an animal, and the new regulation was strongly opposed by the Jewish and Muslim communities in Denmark.

Under the new rule, the provision in current Danish regulations that allows an exemption for ritual slaughter that follows elaborate procedures, including stunning immediately after slaughter, will be eliminated. Apparently the regulatory change will have little practical effect at least on the supply of kosher meat, since for the past ten years all kosher meat sold in Denmark has been imported from abroad.

The Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Ministry's website says: "In Denmark all ritual slaughter of animals at slaughterhouses is performed with previous stunning at the moment." JTA reports that according to the president of Denmark's Jewish community, Danish Jews agreed in 1998 to the certification as kosher of meat from cattle that were stunned with non-penetrative captive bolt pistols.  However a Danish rabbi disputes this, saying the agreement probably referred to post-cut stunning, but since no kosher slaughter has taken place in Denmark for at least 10 years, it is unclear. In discussing the new regulation, Agriculture and Food Minister Dan Jørgensen told Danish television: "Animal rights come before religion."

Catholic Bishops In Various Countries At Odds Over Anti-Gay Laws

Religion News Service reported yesterday on "unusually stark and public fissures" among Catholic bishops in various countries over whether to support or oppose harsh anti-gay laws being enacted or revived in some countries of Africa, Asia and elsewhere. For example, after Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan recently signed new anti-gay legislation, the Nigerian Catholic hierarchy  praised the president's "courageous and wise decision."  However, a few days later an editorial in a newspaper run jointly by the bishops of South Africa, Botswana and Swaziland, took a very different view, calling on the Catholic Church in Africa "to stand with the powerless" and "sound the alarm at the advance throughout Africa of draconian legislation aimed at criminalizing homosexuals." Similar disagreements can be seen among bishops in Europe and Asia.

India Supreme Court Orders Stop To Imminent Devadasi Ceremony That Often Exploits Young Girls

The Calcutta Telegraph reports that India's Supreme Court yesterday took quick action in response to a recently filed Public Interest Lawsuit to try to prevent exploitation of young girls in a ceremony scheduled for the night of February 13-14 in front of the Uttangi Durga Hindu temple in the city of Davangere in India's Karnataka state. According to the report:

Under the devadasi system, girls on attaining puberty are married off to the local temple’s female deity at a ceremony willingly consented to by the parents in most cases, though in some cases local panchayats have been known to use a certain degree of coercion.

After being “married” off and “dedicated” to the deity, the girls are forced to sing and dance before their village chiefs, rich landlords and other influential persons and have often been sexually exploited.

The PIL cited newspaper reports that said that despite the Karnataka Devadasis (Prohibition of Dedication) Act, 1982, the practice continued.... The petition alleged that many devadasis, exploited by local landlords and influential men, had been left to fend for themselves and were dying of poverty or sexually transmitted diseases.

The court told counsel for the non-profit foundation filing the suit that they should have come to the court sooner.  As an interim measure, the court yesterday faxed an order to the chief secretary of the state of Karnataka ordering him to take steps to prevent unmarried girls from being forced to become devadasis at the February 13-14 religious event.

Suit By Evangelical Family Challenges Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone

The Thomas More Law Center yesterday announced that it has filed a federal lawsuit challenging a Portland, Maine ordinance that creates a 39-foot buffer zone around reproductive health clinics to prevent protests and counseling on sidewalks near the city's single clinic that provides abortions. The complaint (full text) in Fitzgerald v. City of Portland, (D ME, filed 2/12/2014), alleges that plaintiffs, a family who identify themselves as Evangelicals, have been peacefully praying and counseling women outside the clinic for 16 months, passing out literature and Bible tracts. The ordinance prevents their activities. The suit claims that this is a broad, vague content-based prior restraint on their speech. A suit raising similar legal issues was argued before the U.S. Supreme Court last month. (See prior posting.)

2 Minnesota Catholic Dioceses Sued In Demand For Files of Abusive Priests

In a suit filed in a Minnesota state trial court on Wednesday against two Catholic dioceses, plaintiff who claims to have been abused as a 13-year old boy by Catholic priest James Vincent Fitzgerald is seeking release by the dioceses of the complete files of priests who have been credibly accused of abuse. As reported by Forum News Service, the alleged victim, identified only as "Doe 30", has sued the Diocese of Duluth and the Diocese of New Ulm saying that the abuse occurred in 1976. This is the third suit by various victims against the Diocese of Duluth demanding release of files.  So far the diocese has only released the names (along with basic biographical data) of accused priests. Fitzgerald worked at 6 parishes of the Diocese of Duluth from 1957 to 1983, and worked in the New Ulm diocese from 1977-78. Plaintiff's attorney claims the Duluth Diocese knew of should have known of Fitzgerald's actions and moved him between parishes where he continued to have access to children. The Diocese however says that no abuse complaints against Fitzgerald surfaced prior to late last year.

Milwaukee Archdiocese Files Reorganization Plan; Criticized As Inadequate By Victims

AP reports that the Catholic Archdiocese of Milwaukee yesterday filed its Plan of Reorganization with federal bankruptcy court. Under the Plan, $4 million will be set aside to compensate 125 clergy sex abuse victims-- the smallest per victim payments yet in any of the 11 bankruptcy reorganizations of dioceses around the country. Over 400 individuals filing claims as victims will not receive payment-- including those beyond the statute of limitations, claimants who already received a settlement from the archdiocese and those abused by priests from religious orders or by parish employees. Also $500,000 will be set aside in a lifetime Therapy Fund for victims.  A Q&A on the Plan of Reorganization posted on the Archdiocese's website gives details on the plan. In a letter posted on the Archdiocese's website, Archbishop Listecki said that the Archdiocese will emerge from bankruptcy with at least $7 million in debt, adding:

The archdiocese has historically operated on a balanced budget, so the burden of paying off this debt will certainly be part of our penance.  I wish we wouldn’t have had to spend the past three years and millions of dollars on attorneys’ fees to get to this point, but now we have a Plan that moves us forward.

Abuse victims strongly criticized the Plan as insufficient, one saying: "It is much like being raped all over again...." The victim advocacy group SNAP issued a statement calling the Plan "breath-taking in its callousness, selfishness and arrogance."

Pharmacist Sues After His Firing For Refusing To Sell "Morning After" Contraceptives

Thomas More Society announced yesterday that it has filed a federal lawsuit on behalf a a pharmacist who was fired by from his position at a Jamestown, Tennessee Walgreen's after he told management he would not participate in the sale of Plan B oral contraceptives.  The complaint (full text) in Hall v. Walgreen Company, (MD TN, filed 2/11/2014), alleges that the company previously permitted pharmacist Phillip Hall to refer customers seeking to purchase Plan B to another pharmacist in the store as a way of accommodating Hall's religious objections to selling the emergency contraceptive which he believes is an abortifacient. However the store changed its policy once it began to stock a new over-the-counter version of Plan B.  A factor in Hall's firing apparently was also his action in personally purchasing and disposing of the store's first shipment of 6 boxes of the over-the-counter version as a way to prevent its being available. The complaint alleges that Hall's firing violated Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the free exercise clause of the Tennessee constitution and Tennessee's Right to Refuse statute that protects anyone from being required to participate in the performance of an abortion.

Suits Challenge Missouri's and Louisiana's Refusals To Recognize Out-of-State Same-Sex Marriages

Yesterday, the ACLU announced that has filed a state court lawsuit on behalf of 8 Missouri same-sex couples challenging Missouri's statutory and state constitutional provisions that deny recognition to plaintiffs' marriages that were legally entered into in other jurisdictions. The complaint (full text) in Barrier v. Vasterling, (MO Cir. Ct. Jackson County, filed 2/12/2014) contends:

Missouri’s exclusion of married same-sex couples from the protections and responsibilities of marriage violates the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. This discriminatory treatment is subject to heightened scrutiny because it burdens the fundamental right to marry and because it discriminates based on sex and sexual orientation. But it cannot stand under any level of scrutiny because Missouri’s refusal to recognize the legal marriages of same-sex couples does not rationally further any legitimate government interest. It serves only to disparage and injure same-sex couples and their families.

Reporting on the lawsuit, the Columbia Missourian notes:

Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon drew criticism from gay marriage opponents in November when he directed the state Department of Revenue to accept joint tax returns from same-sex couple who are legally married in other states.... The directive prompted a lawsuit filed by same-sex marriage opponents, and led a Republican lawmaker last week to file articles of impeachment against the Democratic governor.

Meanwhile, in Louisiana an organization that advocates for LGBT equality filed a federal court lawsuit challenging Louisiana's statutory and state constitutional provisions that bar recognition of same-sex marriages validly performed elsewhere. The complaint (full text) in Forum for Equality Louisiana, Inc. v. Barfield, (ED LA, filed 2/12/2014), in claiming that the Louisiana Anti-Recognition Laws violate plaintiffs' equal protection and due process rights, focuses particularly on the state's refusal to accept joint tax returns from married same-sex couples and its refusal to issue birth certificates naming same-sex couples as parents of a child.  The New Orleans Times Picayune reports on the lawsuit.

Court Says Kentucky Must Recognize Valid Same-Sex Marriages From Elsewhere

In Bourke v. Beshear, (WD KY, Feb. 12, 2014), a Kentucky federal district court struck down Kentucky's state constitutional and statutory provisions that deny recognition to valid same-sex marriages performed elsewhere. The court held that "denial of recognition for valid same-sex marriages violates the United States Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection under the law, even under the most deferential standard of review."  Explaining its decision, the court said in part:

Many Kentuckians believe in “traditional marriage.” Many believe what their ministers and scriptures tell them: that a marriage is a sacrament instituted between God and a man and a woman for society’s benefit. They may be confused—even angry—when a decision such as this one seems to call into question that view. These concerns are understandable and deserve an answer. 

Our religious beliefs and societal traditions are vital to the fabric of society. Though each faith, minister, and individual can define marriage for themselves, at issue here are laws that act outside that protected sphere. Once the government defines marriage and attaches benefits to that definition, it must do so constitutionally. It cannot impose a traditional or faith-based limitation upon a public right without a sufficient justification for it. Assigning a religious or traditional rationale for a law, does not make it constitutional when that law discriminates against a class of people without other reasons.

The court added that while it was not presented with the question of the validity of Kentucky's ban on issuing marriage licenses for same-sex marriages in the state, "there is no doubt that Windsor and this Court’s analysis suggest a possible result to that question."  WFPL News reports on the decision. [Thanks to Tom Rutledge for the lead.]

7th Circuit Hears Oral Arguments In Notre Dame's Contraceptive Mandate Accommodation Challenge

The U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments (audio of full arguments) yesterday in University of Notre Dame v. Sebelius.  In the case, an Indiana federal district court rejected Notre Dame's claim that its rights under RFRA and the 1st Amendment are infringed by applying the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage mandate accommodation to its self-insured employee plan and its health insurance policies offered to students.  (See prior posting.) The exchanges in yesterday's arguments between Notre Dame's counsel Matthew Kairis and Judge Richard Posner were particularly contentious. (Note-- there is no sound for the first 2:30 minutes of the audio.) Chicago Tribune reports on the oral arguments.  [Thanks to Stephen Blakeman for the lead.]

4th Circuit: North Carolina May Not Issue Pro-Life Plates And Refuse Pro-Choice Ones

In ACLU v. Tata, (4th Cir., Feb. 11, 2014), the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals held that North Carolina has engaged in unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination when it specifically authorized a "Choose Life" specialty license plate and refused to issue a pro-choice specialty plate.  The court rejected the state's argument that this was permissible because specialty plates are government speech:

[W]e agree with the district court “that sufficient private speech interests are implicated by the specialty license plates to preclude a finding of purely government speech.”.... 

North Carolina ... laments that if it has created a forum, it “must allow all viewpoints to be heard via specialty plates.” .... This complaint seems at odds with North Carolina’s contention that its vast array of specialty plates “celebrat[es]” the “diversity of its citizen’s interests . . . .”... Apparently, North Carolina wishes to celebrate only some interests of some of its citizens— namely those with which it agrees. This, it may not do.

North Carolina then sounds the death knell for specialty plates, predicting a “flood” of “Kill The Sea Turtles” and “Children Last” plates that will force it to end its specialty plate program.... Melodrama aside, our ruling today “does not render [North] Carolina powerless to regulate its specialty license plate forum.” ... But it must do so in a viewpoint-neutral fashion—which it already does, to some extent, by requiring three hundred applicants before issuing a new specialty plate. Surely such a requirement can filter out “frivolous license plate proposals” and prevent the roads from being inundated with “license plates advocating reckless pet breeding.”

WRAL News reports on the decision.

Alabama Proposal Would Call For Reading Congressional Prayers In Classrooms

Proponents of school prayer have come up with a new approach in Alabama. Proposed House Bill 318 calls for reading prayers from the Congressional Record to teach students about Congress' formal procedures:

At the commencement of the first class of each day in all grades in all public schools, the teacher ... shall, for a period of time not exceeding 15 minutes, instruct the class in the formal procedures followed by the United States Congress.  The study shall include, but not be limited to, a reading verbatim of one of the opening prayers given by the House or Senate Chaplain or a guest member of the clergy at the beginning of a meeting of the House of Representatives or the Senate.

The Anniston Star this week quotes the Rep. Steve Hurst, the bill's sponsor:

Hurst said the bill would help students learn more about history and civics. "They could read the prayer from the day war was declared in World War II," he said. "They could read the prayer the day after Sept. 11."

Random House Affiliate Agrees To Withdraw Scholar's Book On Hinduism To Settle Lawsuit In India

The New York Times and the Financial Times report that in India, the publisher  Penguin India (an affiliate of US publisher Penguin Random House) has agreed to settle a lawsuit brought against it by a Hindu activist group by withdrawing all unsold copies of The Hindus: An Alternative History.  The book, authored by University of Chicago Professor Wendy Doniger and published in 2009, was  criticized by a reviewer as over-eroticizing the religion.  In 2010, Dina Nath Batra, the head of Shiksha Bacho Andolan (Save Education Movement), filed a lengthy notice (full text) with the author detailing passages he found to be "shallow," "distorted" and "riddled with heresies and factual inaccuracies." The notice threatened legal action under Section 153, 153A, 295A, 298, 505(2) of Indian Penal Code. These provisions, among other things, bar insulting religious beliefs and promoting ill-will between religious groups. A lawsuit was filed in 2011, and apparently complaints were also filed with prosecutors.

Under the settlement (full text), Penguin will "recall and withdraw all copies of the book" and no longer "sell, publish or distribute" it.  The recalled copies will be "pulped" by Penguin. In exchange, plaintiffs will withdraw all "civil and criminal cases/ complaints." Currently the book remains listed on Penguin India's website.  Apparently the book will remain available in India on Kindle.  In a statement reacting to developments, Prof. Doniger criticized "Indian law, which makes it a criminal rather than civil offence to publish a book that offends any Hindu, a law that jeopardises the physical safety of any publisher, no matter how ludicrous the accusation."

Suit Asks Ohio To Recognize Same-Sex Marriages On Birth Certificates

A suit was filed by three couples on Monday in an Ohio federal district court to require state officials to recognize same-sex marriages validly performed elsewhere when issuing birth certificates. The complaint (full text) in Henry v. Wymyslo, (SD OH, filed 2/10/2014) alleges that state and local health department officials will permit only one parent from married same-sex couples to be listed on the birth certificate of their children. It continues:

Plaintiffs challenge this unequal treatment as unconstitutional. These same Defendants were recently ordered to recognize valid out-of state marriages between same-sex couples on death certificates..... The reasoning from that case compels recognition of same-sex marriages on birth certificates.

Cincinnati Enquirer reports on the filing of the lawsuit.

DC Circuit: RFRA Does Not Protect Guantanamo Detainees

In Aamer v. Obama, (DC Cir., Feb. 11, 2014), the D.C. Circuit denied a preliminary injunction to Guantanamo detainees who brought a habeas corpus action to challenge the government's force feeding protocol used to protect the health of detainees engaged in protest hunger strikes.  Among the detainees' claims was that their force feeding violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act because it prevents them from from engaging in communal prayers during Ramadan.  Judge Tatel's majority opinion (which also dealt at length with other issues) held that RFRA’s protections do not extend to Guantanamo detainees. He reaffirmed prior precedent in the D.C. Circuit that nonresident aliens do not qualify as protected “person[s]” within the meaning of RFRA. Judge Williams, dissenting, did not reach the RFRA issue because he urged dismissal of the entire action on jurisdictional grounds. [Thanks to Arthur Spitzer for the lead.]

Nevada Tells 9th Circuit It Will No Longer Defend Its Same-Sex Marriage Ban

According to AP, Nevada's attorney general yesterday filed a statement with the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals informing the court that the state will no longer defend its ban on same-sex marriage. The move comes in the pending appeal in Sevcik v. Sandoval, in which a Nevada federal district court upheld the ban against an Equal Protection Clause challenge. (See prior posting.) The attorney general told the court:

After thoughtful review and analysis, the state has determined that its arguments grounded upon equal protection and due process are no longer sustainable.

Nevada's Governor Brian Sandoval agrees with the attorney general.

As described by SCOTUSblog, the state changed its position after considering the 9th Circuit's decision last month in SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. Abbott Laboratories, (9th Cir., Jan. 21, 2014) holding that heightened scrutiny must be applied to equal protection claims based on sexual orientation. The case held that peremptory jury challenges may not be made on the basis of sexual orientation.

Developments In Utah Same-Sex Marriage Litigation

Numerous amicus briefs have been filed in the 10th Circuit in Kitchen v. Herbert, the appeal of the Utah federal district court's decision striking down the ban on same-sex marriage in Utah. Of particular interest is the amicus brief (full text) filed yesterday by major religious organizations urging reversal of the district court. The brief, filed by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops; National Association of Evangelicals; The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints; The Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention; and Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod argues:

Undermining the husband-wife marital institution by redefining it to include same-sex couples will, in the long term, harm vital child-welfare interests that only the husband-wife definition can secure. The result will be more mothers and fathers concluding that the highest end of marriage is not the welfare of their children but the advancement of their own life choices. We know, from personal experience over numerous decades of ministering to families and children, that more focus on satisfying adult needs will not benefit vulnerable children.

The Salt Lake Tribune has a summary of the over 20 briefs filed in support of Utah's position, and reports at more length on the brief filed by religious organizations.

Meanwhile, last month the ACLU filed a lawsuit (press release) seeking to require Utah to recognize as valid the more than 1000 same-sex marriages performed in the state after the district court struck down the ban and before the U.S. Supreme Court stayed the decision.  The complaint (full text) in Evans v. State of Utah, (UT 3d Dist. Ct., filed 1/21/2014), argues that by not fully recognizing the marriages, the state has deprived couples of liberty and property interests protected by the due process clause of the Utah constitution and by 42 USC Sec. 1983:

By placing recognition of their marriages “on hold,” the State of Utah has placed the legal status of all same-sex married couples, including Plaintiffs and their families and children, in legal limbo and created uncertainty as to their rights and status in virtually all areas of their lives.

The ACLU provides links to other documents and items relating to the case.

Home Schooler Sues To Play On Christian School's Atlhletic Teams

The Central Pennsylvania Patriot-News yesterday reported on a lawsuit by the mother of a home-schooled high school freshman who wants to play on a Christian school's soccer and basketball teams.  Under the rules of the Pennsylvania Intercollegiate Athletic Association, home schoolers are allowed to play on public school teams in district in which they live. Here the parents want the boy to be able to participate on the teams of Covenant Christian Academy, also located in the boy's home district. Plaintiff says that PIAA is misinterpreting its own rules, and is also denying her the constitutional right to direct the education of her son. The suit was originally filed in state court, but defendants are seeking to remove it to federal court.

St. Louis Diocese Provides Court With List of Accused Priests and Victims

According to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch yesterday, the Catholic Archdiocese of St. Louis has complied with a trial court's order to turn over to the court and plaintiff's attorney in a pending lawsuit the names of priests who have been accused of sexually abusing minors over a 20-year period, as well as contact information of the victims. The order comes in a suit filed in 2011 by a woman who says she was abused by a now-defrocked priest. Last week the Missouri Supreme Court rejected the Archdiocese's challenge to the trial court's order.  The list remains under seal. The trial court will appoint an attorney to make first contact with the victims, rather than having that contact come from plaintiff's lawyer.

Neighbor Sues Over Home's Use As Synaogue

KDFW News reported last week on a lawsuit in Dallas, Texas against a rabbi who is using a home in a residential neighborhood as a meeting place for his 25-person Orthodox Jewish congregation.  David Schneider, who lives in the home across the street and was recently elected head of the homeowners association, says that the rabbi is violating homeowners association rules. Schneider is seeking $50,000 in damages contending that the synagogue has lowered his property values.  Religious services are held in the synagogue twice a day, and Rabbi Yaakov Rich has filed a certificate with the City of Dallas notifying it of his use of the building as a synagogue, known as Congregation Toras Chaim. Liberty Institute is defending the synagogue, contending that the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act protects the right to use the home for religious meetings and worship. (Press release.)

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Levi Cooper, The Assimilation of Tikkun Olam, (Jewish Political Studies Review 25, no. 3-4 (Fall 2014)).
• Howard Kislowicz, Sacred Laws in Earthly Courts: Legal Pluralism in Canadian Religious Freedom Litigation, (Queen's Law Journal, Vol. 39, No. 1, 2013).
• Corey L. Brettschneider, Value Democracy as the Basis for Viewpoint Neutrality: A Theory of Free Speech and Its Implications for the State Speech and Limited Public Forum Doctrines, (Northwestern University Law Review, Vol. 107, No. 2, 2013).
• Galen L. Fletcher, Loyal Opposition: Ernest L. Wilkinson's Role in Founding the BYU Law School, (BYU Studies Quarterly 52, No. 4 (2013)).
• Haider Ala Hamoudi, Decolonizing the Centralist Mind: Legal Pluralism and the Rule of Law, (The International Rule Of Law Movement: A Crisis Of Legitimacy And The Way Forward (Harvard University Press 2014 Forthcoming)).
• Eric Bennett Rasmusen, Comments on the Riggs Case as used in the 'Historians and Legal Scholars' Amicus Brief in the Hobby Lobby Obamacare Mandate Case, (February 3, 2014).
• D. Kelly Weisberg, Karen Thompson's Role in the Movement for Marriage Equality, (25 Hastings Women's Law Journal 3, 2014).
• Anthony C. Infanti, Big (Gay) Love: Has the IRS Legalized Polygamy?, (North Carolina Law Review Addendum, 2014, Forthcoming).
• Andrew F. March, What Can the Islamic Past Teach Us About Secular Modernity?, (Political Theory (Forthcoming)).

From SmartCILP:

• Bogac A. Ergene, Islamic Law in Action: A Historical Discussion, (Reviewing Kristen Stilt, Islamic Law in Action: Authority, Discretion, and Everyday Experiences in Mamluk Egypt), [Abstract], 38 Law & Social Inquiry 1041-1057 (2013).
• Annika Thiem, Theological-Political Ruins: Walter Benjamin, Sovereignty, and the Politics of Skeletal Eschatology, [Abstract], 24 Law & Critique 295-315 (2013).

New Mexico Supreme Court Upholds Cultural Property Designation For Mount Taylor

In Rayellen Resources, Inc. v. New Mexico Cultural Properties Review Committee, (NM Sup. Ct., Feb. 6, 2014), the New Mexico Supreme Court upheld the decision of the state's Cultural Properties Review Committee to recognize 400,000 acres of public land on Mount Taylor as a registered cultural property under the New Mexico Cultural Properties Act. The mountain is a sacred site for the Navajos and several other Native American tribes. The court held that it was permissible for the Committee to use federal National Register guidelines and then went on to reject arguments that the Committee has misapplied these guidelines:

the Committee made numerous findings relating to Mount Taylor’s eligibility for listing, including that the nomination satisfied three of the four possible federal criteria because Mount Taylor was associated with significant contributions to our history and with persons significant in our past, and it offers a past and potential future yield of information about our history. Although these findings undoubtedly include a religious component, because religion is part of culture and history, the findings are nonetheless based primarily on historical evidence....  [S]ubstantial evidence supports the Committee’s findings on Mount Taylor’s historic eligibility.... 

The court, applying the Lemon test, also rejected the argument that the listing of Mount Taylor violates the Establishment Clause.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Wall v. Wade, (4th Cir., Feb. 3, 2014), the 4th Circuit vacated a Virginia federal district court's dismissal of damage claims and held that it is unconstitutional for a prison to condition inmates' participation in Ramadan observances on their providing some physical indicia of Islamic faith, such as a Quran, Kufi, prayer rug, or written religious material obtained from the prison Chaplain’s office.

In Holtz v. Karr, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12519 (WD WA, Jan. 23, 2014), a Washington federal magistrate judge recommended that a Muslim inmate be permitted to proceed with his claims against the county alleging that jail policies interfere with his ability to practice Islam and are religiously discriminatory. Plaintiff's complaint covers religious living units, diet, and religious dress, items and prayer.

In Stevens v. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12586 (MD PA, Jan. 31, 2014), a Pennsylvania federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13098, Jan. 14, 2014) and dismissed claims by a Native American inmate for $1 billion in damages for crushing his spirits; a "review of all religious freedoms towards Native American[s]"; and a written apology published in a newspaper after he did not hear his name called out for the Hoop worship service.

In Mitchell v. Fox, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13845 (ED WA, Feb. 4, 2014), a Washington federal district court dismissed a Muslim inmate's complaint that his copy of the Qur'an was damaged and later taken and that two prayer books were taken during a search. He could have obtained another copy of the Qur'an from the chaplain.

In Gray v. Lewis, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13899 (ND CA, Feb. 4, 2014), a California federal district court permitted an inmate who was a follower of the Yahweh religion to move ahead with his complaint that he was denied kosher meals.

In Fowler v. CDCR, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13922 (ED CA, Feb. 3, 2014) and Nible v. CDCR, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13924 (ED CA, Feb. 4, 2014), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed with leave to amend complaints by inmates that they were deprived of outdoor worship space chapel access, religious items and funds to practice the Asatru/Odinic religion, while mainstream religions were supported.

In Palermo v. New Hampshire State Prison, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14096 (D NH, Feb. 4, 2014), a New Hampshire federal district court allowed an inmate to move ahead with his complaint that prison officials refused to recognize his religion; provide him with religious items or a religious diet; or allow him to receive religious posters or attend group worship.

In Ali v. Stephens, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14460 (ED TX, Feb. 4, 2014), a Texas federal magistrate judge granted a Muslim inmate a TRO and preliminary injunction allowing him to wear a one-quarter inch beard, but denied a TRO and preliminary injunction on his request to wear a full beard and to wear his kufi cap throughout the prison at all times.

In Reiske v. Bruno, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14696 (D CT, Feb. 6, 2014), a Connecticut federal district court refused to grant an inmate who is a second degree Wicca priest a TRO or preliminary injunction to require prison authorities to recognize his Wicca religion and allow him to purchase various religious items such as candles, oils, bowls and rope.

In Fox v. Stephens, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15272 (SD TX, Feb. 6, 2014), a Texas federal district court dismissed an inmate's free exercise claims because they were not appropriately raised by a habeas corpus action and because the suit is subject to the 3-strike bar for frivolous in forma pauperis litigation.

Nigeria Cracking Down on Gays

Today's New York Times carries a long front-page article titled Wielding Whip and a Hard New Law, Nigeria Tries to ‘Sanitize’ Itself of Gays.  Here is an excerpt:

Rights advocates say they have recorded arrests in multiple Nigerian states, but the country’s north has experienced the toughest crackdown. Mr. Jonathan’s national ban has redoubled the zeal against gay people here and elsewhere, according to officials and residents in Bauchi, where Shariah law prevails and green-uniformed Hisbah, or Islamic police officers, search for what is considered immoral under Islam.

“It’s reawakened interest in communities to ‘sanitize,’ more or less, to talk about ‘moral sanitization,’ ” Dorothy Aken’Ova, executive director of Nigeria’s International Center for Reproductive Health and Sexual Rights, said of the law. “Where it was quiet before, it’s gotten people thinking, ‘Who is behaving in a manner that may be gay?’ It’s driven people into the closet.”...

 “God has not allowed this thing; we are not animals,” said Umar Inuwa Obi, 32, a student who said he was in the mob that hurled stones and bottles at the court and the prison van transporting the gay suspects two weeks ago.

“In Shariah court you are supposed to kill the man,” Mr. Obi said, adding that he favored this judgment. “But the government has refused. That’s why they started throwing stones and bottles.”

(See prior related posting.)

Justice Department Will Give Nation-Wide Recognition To Lawful Same-Sex Marriages

In a speech (full text) to the Human Rights Campaign dinner last night, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder announced that the Justice Department will issue a new policy memorandum on Monday to formally instruct all Justice Department employees to give lawful same-sex marriages full and equal recognition in carrying out Justice Department activities in all states.

This means that same-sex spouses will be able to refuse to testify against their spouses in federal court proceedings, even in states that do not recognize same-sex marriages. Same-sex marriages will be treated the same as heterosexual marriages in bankruptcy proceedings, allowing same-sex couples to file jointly for bankruptcy and making alimony owed to a former same-sex spouse generally non-dischargeable. Federal inmates in same-sex marriages will have the same spousal visitation, furlough, correspondence and compassionate release rights as opposite-sex spouses. Same -sex spouses will be recognized in various benefit programs administered by the Department of Justice-- the Radiation Exposure Compensation Program; the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund; and the Public Safety Officers’ Benefits Program.

HRC issued a press release reacting to Holder's remarks, saying: "Today, our nation moves closer toward its ideals of equality and fairness for all."

UPDATE: Here is the Memorandum issued by the Attorney General.

Magistrate Recommends Dismissal of Suit Over Disturbing Church Bells

In Devaney v. Kilmartin, (D RI, Feb. 6, 2014), a Rhode Island federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing a Narragansett, Rhode Island resident's complaint about constantly ringing church bells.  The court described plaintiff's complaint:

the Amended Complaint focuses on St. Thomas More Church’s electronically-amplified bells, located across the street from Mr. Devaney’s home, which he contends have gonged and pealed 700 times per week at upwards of 100 decibels for at least thirteen years. The Amended Complaint adds another nearby church, St. Peter’s Episcopal Church, which Mr. Devaney avers has rung its electronically-amplified bells hourly during daylight “beginning after Plaintiff moved to his home” eighteen years ago. Mr. Devaney alleges that the constant ringing has caused emotional distress and denied him peaceful enjoyment of his property.... 

Recommending dismissal without prejudice, the magistrate judge concluded:

While Mr. Devaney’s exasperation is clear as a bell in his Amended Complaint, the connection between his pique and a plausible federal cause of action is not. It is conceivable that he may have an important claim arising under the United States Constitution; however, his pleading does not articulate one.

WPRI reports on the decision.

Australian Court Says Wearing Kippah Does Not Excuse Absence of Bike Helmet

In Thomas v. Kent, (WASC, Feb. 4, 2014), the Supreme Court of Western Australia upheld the conviction of Simon Thomas for riding a bicycle without wearing a protective helmet. Thomas claimed that he was not wearing his helmet because he was wearing a kippah (a Jewish skullcap). Thomas said that he wears a kippah on three occasions each year, one of which is his birthday. But the court said that there had been no evidence introduced as to the religious reason for not placing a helmet over the skullcap, nor was there evidence that wearing a kippah made wearing a helmet impractical. News.com.au reports on the decision.

Pentagon Says New Supplier For Kosher MREs Will Be Found

According to a JTA report earlier this week, the Pentagon says it is committed to supporting the religious dietary requirements of service members. The statement comes after Agudath Israel of America complained to  the top military chaplain that a solicitation by the Defense Logistics Agency last April for bids to cover halal and kosher MREs (meals ready-to-eat) was reissued last month to cover only halal MREs. The Defense Department acknowledges it was unsuccessful in obtaining bids for kosher MREs, but says it has issued a new solicitation and expects to select a supplier by April. Meanwhile it has sufficient kosher MREs on hand to meet the needs of Jewish members of the military deployed to the Central Command region (which includes the Middle East and Afghanistan).

In Fragmented Decision, Washington Supreme Court Finds Discrimination Exemption For Religious Non-Profits Unconstitutional As Applied

The Washington state Supreme Court yesterday answered certified questions from a federal district court in a fragmented decision.  In  Ockletree v. Franciscan Health System, (SA Sup. Ct., Feb. 6, 2014), the state's high court responded to two questions of state constitutional law: (1) Does the exclusion in the Washington Law Against Discrimination for religious non-profit organizations violate the state constitution's equal privileges and immunities clause or its free exercise clause. (2) If not, is the exclusion unconstitutional when applied to prevent a suit by an employee who claims discrimination unrelated to any religious purpose, practice or activity of defendant.  The suit involved a claim of discrimination on the basis of race and disability in the firing of a security guard by a Catholic hospital.

In the lead opinion, 4 justices answered the first certified question in the negative, concluding that "WLAD's definition of 'employe'... does not involve a privilege or immunity" and "does not involve the appropriation of money or application of property, and therefore does not fall within the prohibition of article I, section 11 's establishment clause."

Dissenting, 4 justices disagreed, saying: "WLAD grants religious nonprofits immunity from a right of action that belongs to all Washington citizens by virtue of citizenship. Under the privileges and immunities clause, the legislature cannot grant such immunity to one class of corporations unless there are reasonable grounds for excluding others. Because WLAD grants immunity from discrimination claims that are unrelated to the employer's religious beliefs, it is not necessary to alleviate a concrete and substantial burden on religious exercise."

In a separate opinion, Justice Wiggins provided a 5th vote for answering the first certified question in the negative, concluding that the exclusion is not unconstitutional on its face.  However he also provided a fifth vote for answering the second certified question in the affirmative, but only after insisting that the second certified question needs to be reframed, saying:

The original second certified question improperly focused on whether the employer discriminated on religious grounds, which requires courts to engage in excessive entanglement with religious doctrines and practices. Washington courts would be asked to determine what constitutes a particular religion's purpose, practice, and activity and determine whether the reason for the discrimination is related. This is an intrusive inquiry into religious doctrine. 

When the exemption is applied to a person whose job qualifications and responsibilities are unrelated to religion, there is no reasonable ground for distinguishing between a religious organization and a purely secular organization. Therefore, I agree with the dissent that the exemption is invalid when applied to an employee like Ockletree, assuming that there is no relationship between his duties and religion or religious practices.

(See prior related posting.) AP reports on the decision.

Law Prof-Rabbi Resigns From Rabbinical Group To Avoid Ethics Probe Over Online Pseudonyms

TJC reported yesterday that Emory University law professor Rabbi Michael Broyde has resigned from the Rabbinical Council of America rather than face an ethics investigation by the organization over charges that he created false identities to use online to submit letters to Jewish journals, post blog comments (including ones commenting on his own work), and to join a rival rabbinical group (International Rabbinic Fellowship) to gain access to its listserv.  (See prior posting.) The RCA had already given Broyde an indefinite leave of absence from his membership and from his longstanding role as a rabbinical court judge at the Beit Din of America.  Apparently Broyde's latest resignation applies only to the RCA and not to his Bet Din role. Previously Emory Law School cleared Broyde of violating university rules since his conduct related only to activities in his rabbinic capacity. (See prior posting.)

Cert. Petitions On Prison Grooming Rules

Yesterday a petition for certiorari (full text) was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in Jones v. Thompson.  In the case (decided as Knight v. Thompson), the 11th Circuit rejected several Native American inmates' RLUIPA challenges to Alabama prison system grooming rules that prohibit them from wearing long hair as required by their religion. The 11th Circuit held that the short-hair policy for male inmates is the least restrictive means of furthering compelling governmental interests in security, discipline, hygiene and safety. (See prior posting.) A cert. petition (full text) was filed last September in another unrelated case also raising the constitutionality of prison grooming policies-- Holt v. Hobbs. Whether or not to grant cert. in that case, involving a Muslim inmate, is on the calendar for the Court's Feb. 21 conference. (See prior related posting.) [Thanks to Douglas Laycock for the lead.]

Suit Challenges Addition of Cross To Los Angeles County Seal

Yesterday, the ACLU announced that it has filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of a number of plaintiffs challenging the recent decision by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors to modify the county seal by adding a cross atop the depiction of the San Gabriel Mission already on it. (See prior posting.) The complaint (full text) in Davies v. Los Angeles Board of County Supervisors, (CD CA, filed 2/6/2014), contends that the cross violates the Establishment Clause as well as provisions in the California constitution that protect free exercise and bar the expenditure of public funds to aid religion. Los Angeles Times reports on the filing of the lawsuit.

Cert. Petition Filed In California Change Therapy Ban Case

Yesterday a petition for certiorari (full text) was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in Pickup v. Brown. In the case,  the 9th Circuit upheld the constitutionality of California Senate Bill 1172 that bans state-licensed mental health providers from engaging in sexual orientation change efforts with patients under 18. (See prior posting.) Liberty Counsel issued a press release announcing the filing of the cert. petition.

Scottish Appeals Panel Upholds Catholic Agency's Adoption Criteria

In St. Margaret's Children and Family Care Society v. Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator, (SCAP, Jan. 31, 2014), the Scottish Charity Appeals Panel overturned the decision of the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator that had directed a Catholic adoption agency to end its adoption placement preference for Catholic couples who have been married for at least two years and its placing on low preference non-Catholics and same-sex couples (since they can only enter civil partnerships). The Appeals Panel held that the agency is a religious organization that can assert its, and its members, right to freedom of religious expression under Art. 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Discussing application of the Equality Act, the Appeals Panel said:

The Panel has decided that there is indirect discrimination but that indirect discrimination is allowed in terms of The Equality Act because it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. The Panel found both the charities exception and the religious exception as contained in The Equality Act to apply....

BBC News reports on the decision. Law & Religion UK blog discusses the opinion at greater length.

Obama Emphasizes International Religious Freedom At National Prayer Breakfast

This morning, President Obama spoke at the 62nd annual National Prayer Breakfast at the Washington Hilton Hotel. As reported on the White House blog, the First Lady, the Vice President and many legislators, officials and clergy also attended.  In his remarks (full text), the President devoted extensive time to issues of religious freedom around the world, saying in part:

We sometimes see religion twisted in an attempt to justify hatred and persecution against other people just because of who they are, or how they pray or who they love.  Old tensions are stoked, fueling conflicts along religious lines, as we’ve seen in the Central African Republic recently.... 

Our faith teaches us that in the face of suffering, we can’t stand idly by.....[F]reedom of religion matters to our national security.... [T]here are times when we work with governments that don’t always meet our highest standards, but they’re working with us on core interests.... At the same time, we also deeply believe that it’s in our interest, even with our partners, sometimes with our friends, to stand up for universal human rights.  So promoting religious freedom is a key objective of U.S. foreign policy.....  

It is not always comfortable to do, but it is right.  When I meet with Chinese leaders ... I stress that realizing China’s potential rests on upholding universal rights, including for Christians, and Tibetan Buddhists, and Uighur Muslims....

When I meet with the President of Burma...  I’ve said that Burma’s return to the international community depends on respecting basic freedoms, including for Christians and Muslims.  I’ve pledged our support to the people of Nigeria, who deserve to worship in their churches and mosques in peace, free from terror.  I’ve put the weight of my office behind the efforts to protect the people of Sudan and South Sudan, including religious minorities.

As we support Israelis and Palestinians as they engage in direct talks, we’ve made clear that lasting peace will require freedom of worship and access to holy sites for all faiths.... 

More broadly, I’ve made the case that no society can truly succeed unless it guarantees the rights of all its peoples, including religious minorities, whether they’re Ahmadiyya Muslims in Pakistan, or Baha’i in Iran, or Coptic Christians in Egypt.  And in Syria, it means ensuring a place for all people -- Alawites and Sunni, Shia and Christian.

Going forward, we will keep standing for religious freedom around the world.  And that includes, by the way, opposing blasphemy and defamation of religion measures, which are promoted sometimes as an expression of religion, but, in fact, all too often can be used to suppress religious minorities.... We continue to stand for the rights of all people to practice their faiths in peace and in freedom.  And we will continue to stand against the ugly tide of anti-Semitism that rears it's ugly head all too often.  I look forward to nominating our next ambassador-at-large for international religious freedom to help lead these efforts....

And finally, as we build the future we seek, let us never forget those who are persecuted today, among them Americans of faith.  We pray for Kenneth Bae, a Christian missionary who’s been held in North Korea for 15 months, sentenced to 15 years of hard labor.... Kenneth Bae deserves to be free....

We pray for Pastor Saeed Abedini.  He’s been held in Iran for more than 18 months, sentenced to eight years in prison on charges relating to his Christian beliefs.... [W]e call on the Iranian government to release Pastor Abedini so he can return to the loving arms of his wife and children in Idaho.... And as we pray for all prisoners of conscience, whatever their faiths, wherever they’re held....

C-Span has a video of the full 90 minutes of speakers at today's National Prayer Breakfast. Time has a brief summary of highlights.

British Court Issues Summons To Mormon Church Head Alleging Teachings Violate Fraud Act

In Britain last week, a Magistrate's Court issued two nearly identical summonses  (full text 1, 2) to Thomas S. Monson, president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, ordering him to appear before the court to answer to charges that seven specified teachings of the Mormon church violated Britain's Fraud Act 2006.  The Telegraph reported yesterday that the summonses stem from a little used procedure in which a private citizen who claims to have evidence that someone has committed a crime can ask a magistrate to summons the alleged violator to respond to charges. Here the private prosecution was filed by Thomas Phillips, a former Mormon who runs MormonThink, a website highly critical of the LDS Church. The summonses allege that Stephen Bloor, a former Mormon bishop, and Christopher Denis Ralph, a former convert, were misled by Mormon teachings to pay an annual tithe to the Church. Volokh Conspiracy discusses the case further.

Church's Challenge To Rezoning Denial Dismissed

In Alger Bible Baptist Church v. Township of Moffatt, (ED MI, Feb. 5, 2014), a Michigan federal district court dismissed a church's constitutional and RLUIPA challenges to a township's refusal to rezone land in a commercial district in which churches are not a permitted use.  The court said:

[Plaintiff] simply alleges that the Zoning Ordinance prevents it from practicing its religion in the precise location where it wants to. But, worthy of emphasis here, a church has no “constitutional right to build its house of worship where it pleases.”

The court's dismissal of plaintiff's equal protection and RLUIPA equal terms claims were without prejudice.  Plaintiff's 1st Amendment and other RLUIPA claims were dismissed with prejudice.

U.N. Committee Report Critical of Vatican on Protection of Children

On January 31, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child finished its 65th Session after adopting its concluding observations and recommendations on six nations, including the Holy See. (Press release.) As reported yesterday by CNN, the Committee's Concluding Observations on the Second Periodic Report of the Holy See (full text) harshly criticized the Vatican's handling of child sexual abuse within the Church. The 16-page report says in part:

The Committee is particularly concerned that in dealing with allegations of child sexual abuse, the Holy See has consistently placed the preservation of the reputation of the Church and the protection of the perpetrators above children’s best interests, as observed by several national commissions of inquiry....

The Committee is concerned about the situation of children born of Catholic priests, who, in many cases, are not aware of the identity of their fathers. The Committee is also concerned that the mothers may obtain a plan for regular payment from the Church until the child is financially independent only if they sign a confidentiality agreement not to disclose any information....

The Committee is particularly concerned that: ... Due to a code of silence imposed on all members of the clergy under penalty of excommunication, cases of child sexual abuse have hardly ever been reported to the law enforcement authorities....; Reporting to national law enforcement authorities has never been made compulsory..... Church authorities, including at the highest levels of the Holy See have shown reluctance and in some instances, refused to cooperate with judicial authorities and national commissions of inquiry.... Limited efforts have been made to empower children enrolled in Catholic schools and institutions to protect themselves from sexual abuse.

(See prior related posting.)  A Vatican Radio interview with Archbishop Silvano Tomasi, Permanent Observer of the Holy See to the United Nations in Geneva, and a statement from the Vatican react to the report. Both of these reactions include expressions of concern apparently directed to the U.N. report's call for the Vatican to review its position on abortion and identify circumstances under which it can be permitted.

Lawsuit By MLK's Estate Seeks His Famous Bible and Nobel Medal From King's Daughter

The Atlanta Journal Constitution reports that a lawsuit was filed in state court in Georgia last Friday by the estate of Martin Luther King, Jr. (controlled by two of King's children, Martin III and Dexter) against King's daughter Bernice seeking to force Bernice to turn over to the King estate Dr. King's "traveling" Bible and his Nobel Prize medal. The Bible is the one President Barack Obama used for his ceremonial swearing-in on MLK Day in 2013. King's heirs agreed in 1995 to sign over rights to various items they inherited to the King estate.  In a statement, Bernice King says she is refusing to turn the items over because her brothers want to sell them to a private buyer. She explained:

As a minister of the Gospel, the thought of selling my daddy’s Bible troubles my mind, vexes my spirit and weighs on my soul.  The thought of profiting from the sale of the Peace Prize Medal, which my father accepted 50 years ago this year on behalf of the greatest demonstration of peace this nation has ever seen, is spiritually violent, unconscionable, historically negligent, and outright morally reprehensible.

The three siblings have been involved in various lawsuits against one another since 2008.

Tennessee Magistrate Who Objected To Parents' Naming Child "Messiah" Is Fired

Reuters reported yesterday that Tennessee Child Support Magistrate Lu Ann Ballew who gained widespread attention after she insisted that parents change their child's first name from "Messiah" to "Martin" has been fired from her position, effective last Friday, by the presiding judge of Tennessee's 4th judicial district. Ballew told the child's parents-- who had a dispute only over the child's last name-- that: "the word Messiah is a title and it's a title that has only been earned by one person and that one person is Jesus Christ." Her decision was reversed by a chancery court judge.  Ballew has been charged with ethics violations for her action by the Tennessee Board of Judicial Conduct. (See prior posting.)

Israel's High Court Bars Subsidies For Some Yeshiva Students Who Have Received Draft Deferrals

In Israel yesterday, the High Court of Justice issued an interim injunction in the sensitive dispute over drafting of ultra-Orthodox Jews into the Israeli military. The Jerusalem Post reports that the Court order prohibits the government from transferring funds for stipends to some 3000 yeshiva students. In 2012, Israel's High Court of Justice held that the "Tal Law" that provided exemptions for ultra-Orthodox students and a framework for subsidizing their religious studies conflicted with Israel's Basic Law, and therefore the Knesset could not extend the law in its then existing form after its July 2012 expiration. (See prior posting.) The Knesset has so far been unable to agree on a new law. However, the government has continued paying stipends, and the Justice Minister issued mass deferrals to Orthodox students who received enlistment orders after the Tal Law expired.  In yesterday's action, the High Court ruled that no future stipends may be paid to yeshiva students in the 1994, 1995, and first half of 1996 cohorts who have received enlistment orders but have been deferred.

Indian Court Reduces Waiting Period Requirement For Christian Divorces

Times of India reports that on Monday the Karntaka High Court ruled that the provision in Section 10A of India's Divorce Act 1869, the law that applies to Christian divorces, which requires a 2-year separation period before a petition can be filed for dissolution of marriage by mutual consent is invalid. The Hindu Marriage Act, the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act and the Special Marriage Act all require only a one-year waiting period.  In a public interest lawsuit, the Karntaka court relied on an earlier decision by the Kerala High Court which held that Christian divorces should also be subject to only a one-year waiting period. According to Indian Supreme Court precedent, the prior ruling of another High Court becomes the law of the land unless it is challenged in the Supreme Court. In that earlier ruling, the Kerala High Court said:

[T]he stipulation of a higher period of two years of mandatory minimum separate residence for those to whom the Divorce Act applies, in contra-distinction to those similarly placed to whom Sec 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, Sec 32B of the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act and Sec 28 of the Special Marriage Act would apply, offends the mandate of equality and right to life under Arts14 and 21 of the Constitution

Orlando Moves Ahead To Take Church Property By Eminent Domain For Soccer Stadium

At its January 27 meeting (Council Minutes), Orlando, Florida City Council approved the use of eminent domain to acquire the property of Faith Deliverance Temple by eminent domain if negotiations with the church are not successful. As reported by the Orlando Sentinel (Jan. 31), the church is the last parcel needed by the city for construction of an $84 million Major League Soccer Stadium. Orlando has been awarded a major league expansion team for 2015. (Background.) In a decision last Friday, a Florida trial court judge ruled that two other parcels needed for the stadium can be taken by eminent domain, finding that the stadium is a legitimate public purpose. In negotiations, the city has offered Faith Deliverance Temple $1.5 million for its property, over  two times its appraised value. The family that owns the church building says it wants $35 million.

9th Circuit Stays Order Pending Cert. Petition In Case Upholding California's "Change Therapy for Minors" Ban

As previously reported, last week the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals denied en banc review of a 3-judge panel's decision that upheld California Senate Bill 1172. The bill bans state-licensed mental health providers from engaging in sexual orientation change efforts with patients under 18.  Now in Pickup v. Brown, (9th Cir., Feb. 3, 2014), the 9th Circuit has agreed to stay its mandate in the case while appellants file a petition for certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court. Liberty Counsel issued a press release announcing the stay.

Mirror of Justice Celebrates 10 Years

Happy 10th Birthday to Mirror of Justice, one of the most thoughtful blogs on law and religion.  In his birthday posting, Rick Garnett describes the vision of the creative group of Catholic law professors who explore Catholic legal theory at MOJ. Others at MOJ have followed up with reflections on the blog's past and future-- a future that we all know will be a bright one.  You can always find a link to MOJ in the Religion Clause sidebar.

Church Permitted To Intervene In Suit Against Internal Revenue Service Over Political Activity By 501(c)(3)'s

In Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Koskinen, (WD WI, Feb. 3, 2014), a Wisconsin federal district court permitted  Father Patrick Malone and the Holy Cross Anglican Church  to intervene as defendants in a lawsuit in which the Freedom From Religion Foundation is suing the Internal Revenue Service to challenge its alleged policy of not  enforcing against churches and religious organizations the Section 501(c)(3) ban on political activity by non-profits. According to the court:

Father Malone, the vicar of the church, regularly makes statements during worship services and church gatherings in which he urges members of the congregation to vote for or against certain candidates for public office..... So far, however, the IRS has not taken any action in response to the church’s activities..... But the church and Father Malone are concerned that if the Foundation obtains the relief it seeks in this lawsuit, then the IRS will be required to “punish” them for having engaged in political activity.

Ontario Court Orders Children From Jewish Sect Back To Quebec For Foster Care

In the Canadian province of Ontario yesterday, a trial court judge ordered that 13 children of the Jewish ultra-Orthodox Lev Tahor sect be returned to child protection authorities in Quebec where a court has already ordered the children be placed in foster care. (See prior posting.) When court proceedings were begun in Quebec, about 200 Lev Tahor members fled to Ontario in the middle of the night. As reported by Canadian Press, Chatham, Ontario judge Stephen Fuerth wrote in part:

It would be impractical at best and potentially harmful at worst if the society were now required, in the context of the need to protect the children, to conduct a separate and new investigation into all of the issues currently before the Court of Quebec...simply because the parents have decided as a tactical manoeuvre to absent themselves from Quebec in order to frustrate the process of justice that had started.

The court stayed its order for 30 days to give the families a chance to appeal, with provision for child protection workers to keep checking on the children. An appeal of the Quebec court order-- entered after the community fled-- is already being appealed.

Indiana Supreme Court Hears Arguments In Home Schooling Organization's Challenge To Retaliation Finding

Yesterday, the Indiana Supreme Court heard oral arguments (video of full arguments) in a case being closely followed by home school proponents-- Fishers Adolescent Catholic Enrichment Society, Inc. v. Bridgewater. In the case, a state appeals court held that the Indiana Civil Rights Commission has jurisdiction over a retaliation claim brought after the religious-based organization (FACES) expelled a family from membership when they complained that FACES refused to make health-related dietary accommodations for their daughter at a masquerade ball it sponsored. (See prior posting.) As reported by the Indianapolis Star, FACES argues that the action by the Civil Rights Commission infringes its religious freedom and its right to determine who will be a member. The student's family argues that the case is about disability discrimination.

Japanese Court Awards Unificationist Damages Against Relatives, Deprogrammer Who Held Him Captive

In Japan, 50-year old Toru Goto, a member of the Unification Church, has won a lawsuit against a religious deprogrammer and against his own brother, sister and sister-in-law who held him captive from September 1995 to February 2008 in an effort to get him to give up his religious beliefs. According to a press release from the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification, the Tokyo District Court in a Jan. 28 decision awarded Goto damages equivalent to $47,000(US). Unificationists hope this is a step toward ending deprogramming in Japan.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN- U.S. Law and Legal Theory

• Robert T. Miller, Dogmatic Philosophy: A Review of 'Religion Without God', (240 First Things 59 (February 2014)).
• Christopher C. Lund, Rethinking the 'Religious Question' Doctrine, (Pepperdine Law Review (symposium) (2014 Forthcoming)).
• Kristine Kalanges, Religious Liberty: Between Strategy and Telos, (11 Review of Faith in International Affairs 28-31 (Winter 2013)).
• Caspar Behme, 'Ein furchtbares Verbrechen ward begangen' – Schuld und Sühne in der Tannhäuser-Legende ('A Fearful Crime Has Been Committed' – Guilt and Expiation in the Tannhäuser Legend), (December 17, 2013).
• Brian McCall, Can a Pluralistic Commonwealth Endure? The Political Problem of Religious Pluralism and Why Philosophers Can't Solve It by Thaddeus J. Kozinski, (Georgetown Journal of Law & Public Policy, Vol. 11, 2013).
• Caroline Mala Corbin, Corporate Religious Liberty, (January 24, 2014).
• Malcolm J. Harkins, The Uneasy Relationship of Hobby Lobby, Conestoga Wood, the Affordable Care Act and the Corporate Person: How a Historical Myth Woven Out of Whole Cloth Has Bedeviled the Legal System for Almost 150 Years, (St. Louis University Journal of Health Law & Policy (2014)).

From SSRN- Non-US Law:

• Gerry van Klinken, Religion, Politics and Class Divisions in Indonesia, (In "Dealing with Diversity," Bernard Adeney-Risakotta (ed.), Geneva: Globethics (2014)).
• Hamid Harasani, The English Rule Against Perpetuities and the Mandated Perpetuity of Islamic Waqfs: Three Colonial Cases, (8 The Journal of Comparative Law 172-191 (2013)).
• Clark B. Lombardi, Constitutional Provisions Making Sharia 'A' or 'The' Chief Source of Legislation: Where Did They Come from? What Do They Mean? Do They Matter?, (American University International Law Review, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 733-74, 2013).
• Kristine Kalanges, Talking Points on Report of the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief (2013). Heiner Bielefeldt, A/HRC/22/51, Human Rights Council, UN, Geneva, (Prepared for the Caritas in Veritate Foundation, May 2013).
• Roberto Perrone, Public Morals and the ECHR, (University of Leicester School of Law Research Paper No. 14-02 (Jan. 2014)).
• Amna M. Qureshi, The Use of Demeanour Evidence in Credibility Assessments at Trial - A Critical Examination, (January 1, 2014).

From SmartCILP and elsewhere:

• Rafat Y. Alwazna, Testing the Precision of Legal Translation: The Case of Translating Islamic Legal Terms Into English, [Abstract], 26 International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 897-907 (2013).
• Benjamin P. Edwards, When Fear Rules in Law's Place: Pseudonymous Litigation As a Response To Systematic Intimidation, 20 Virginia Journal of Social Policy & Law 437-472 (2013).
• William M. Janssen, Led Blindly: One Circuit's Struggle to Faithfully Apply the U.S. Supreme Court's Religious Symbols Constitutional Analysis, [Abstract], 116 West Virginia Law Review 33-107 (2013).
• Irit Rosenblum, Being Fruitful and Multiplying: Legal, Philosophical, Religious, and Medical Perspectives on Assisted Reproductive Technologies in Israel and Internationally, [Abstract], 36 Suffolk Transnational Law Review 627-648 (2013).
• Journal of Law and Religion, Vol. 29, Issue 1 (Feb. 2014) has recently appeared.

Hawaii Supreme Court Says Permit Requirement To Enter Reserve Did Not Infringe Free Exercise Rights

In State v. Armitage, (HI Sup. Ct., Jan. 28, 2014), the Hawaii Supreme Court held that the rights of Native Hawaiians are not infringed by a statute limiting entry into the Kaho'olawe Island Reserve only to those who obtain authorization to do so through a written application process.  Defendants claim they were traveling to the island to proclaim the right of the "Reinstated Kingdom of Hawaii" to the island. The court rejected defendants' arguments that their entry was protected by the Art. XII, Sec. 7 of the Hawaii Constitution which protects the right to engage in traditional and customary Native Hawaiian subsistence, cultural and religious practices. It also rejected their contention that the Native Hawaiian people have a fundamental right to reestablish an autonomous sovereign government. Finally the court rejected defendants' claims that their free expression and free exercise rights were infringed. The court held that the written application process required to obtain entry did not impose a substantial burden on defendants' religious exercise.

Chief Justice Recktenwald wrote a separate opinion in which Justice Nakayama joined concurring with these views, but dissenting as to an unrelated issue.

In Israel, Haifa Chief Rabbi To Be Indicted Over Payoffs In Kashrut Supervision

In Israel, prosecutors last week informed the Chief Sephardic Rabbi of the city of Haifa, Shlomo Chelouche, that he is likely to be indicted for improper conduct in his supervision of kosher food purveyors. According to Thursday's Arutz Sheva, in two instances Chelouche solicited donations to a charitable organization he heads from companies to which he was granting kashrut certificates.  In the case of one of those companies he also arranged a job for a family member. He is also accused of removing the kashrut certificate of a third company, a catering hall, to pressure it to rehire his personal secretary as their kashrut inspector after the individual had been fired. Israel's Justice Minister Tzippy Livni said that because of the charges she would move to suspend Rabbi Chelouche from his positions as Chief Rabbi and religious court judge.

Court Upholds Hawaii Law Permitting Same-Sex Marriage

A news release from Hawaii's Department of Attorney General reports that on Jan. 29 a state trial court judge upheld the constitutionality under both the state and federal constitutions of Hawaii's Marriage Equality Act of 2013:

In his ruling from the bench, Judge Sakamoto noted the importance of marriage under the federal constitution, drawing an analogy to Loving v. Virginia, the landmark United States Supreme Court case that struck down state laws banning inter-racial marriage. He concluded that the Marriage Equality Act is consistent with Article I, section 23 of the Hawaii State Constitution, and that “same-sex marriage is legal.”

Article I, Sec. 23 of Hawaii's constitution provides: "The legislature shall have the power to reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples."

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Daley v. Lappin, (3d Cir., Jan. 29, 2014), the 3rd Circuit vacated and remanded for the most part a decision of a Pennsylvania federal district court in a suit brought by a former federal inmate who was a Rastafarian.  The Court of Appeals held that the district court erred in rejecting plaintiff's claim for a vegan diet merely on the ground that it was not a mandatory tenet of Rastafarianism.

In Harris v. Gipson, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9792 (ED CA, Jan. 24, 2014), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed with leave to amend a Muslim inmate's complaint that he is being denied access to an adequate religious diet.

In Hollins v. Curtin, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10709 (WD MI, Jan. 29, 2014), a Michigan federal district court permitted a Nation of Islam inmate to move ahead with his challenge to a prison's blanket ban on group religious services for all inmates in segregation.

In Sousa v. Wegman, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11132 (ED CA, Jan. 28, 2014), a California federal magistrate judge recommended that a Mexican Indian inmate be permitted to proceed with his complaint that prison officials refused to recognize his religion or allot him outside grounds to conduct services, burn sage and hold sweats. The court held that plaintiff's free exercise claim should not be barred by collateral estoppel, the 11th Amendment, or PLRA exhaustion.

In Washington v. Cate, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12402 (ED CA, Jan. 31, 2014), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed a complaint by a Muslim inmate that his free exercise, equal protection and RLUIPA rights were infringed when was not permitted to have a conjugal visit to consummate his marriage that took place in a prison visiting room. Department of Corrections rules bar conjugal visits for prisoners serving life sentences.

In Martin v. Cate, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12414 (ED CA, Jan. 31, 2014), a California federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing a complaint by a Christian inmate serving a life sentence that his free exercise and RLUIPA rights were infringed by rules denying him conjugal visits with his wife.