Religion Clause

Thursday, March 06, 2014

Senate Rejects Obama's Nominee To Head DOJ Civil Rights Division

Yesterday, the U.S. Senate rejected President Obama's nominee for Assistant Attorney General to head the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice-- Debo Adegbile. Politico reports that several Senate Democrats joined Republicans in the 47-52 vote against cloture that had the effect of defeating the nomination. Adegbile was opposed by law enforcement groups and some senators because of his previous work with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund in helping the convicted killer of a Philadelphia police officer try to overturn his death sentence. Following the vote, President Obama issued a statement (full text), saying in part:

The Senate’s failure to confirm Debo Adegbile to lead the Civil Rights Division at the Department of Justice is a travesty based on wildly unfair character attacks against a good and qualified public servant. Mr. Adegbile’s qualifications are impeccable. He represents the best of the legal profession.... The fact that his nomination was defeated solely based on his legal representation of a defendant runs contrary to a fundamental principle of our system of justice....

British Broadcast Agency Approves KFC's Parody Christmas Ad Campaign

In Britain, broadcast industry self-regulation requires all broadcast ads to be pre-approved to make certain that they comply with the UK Code of Broadcast Advertising. Most of the pre-clearance is done by Clearcast-- an agency created by the country's largest broadcasters. Huffington Post reported yesterday that Kentucky Fried Chicken has obtained clearance for its tongue-in-cheek Christmas ad campaign that some complained mocked Christian worship:

The two television ads and a video on demand ad featured a group of carol singers outside a house singing the lyrics: "We showed up at your house again singing all our stupid songs", with the male homeowner replying: "Normally I'd hose you down, but now it just seems wrong."

Wednesday, March 05, 2014

Affidavit Does Not Establish Applicability of Ministerial Exception Doctrine

Hough v. Roman Catholic Diocese of Erie, (WD PA, March 4, 2014), is an Age Discrimination In Employment suit brought by three former Catholic parochial school teachers who were not hired into a consolidated Catholic school system created when their school closed. The Diocese moved for summary judgment claiming that the "ministerial exception" doctrine precludes plaintiffs' lawsuit. The only evidence that plaintiffs qualify as "ministers" for purposes of the exception were affidavits from the diocese's Vicar for Education stating that all parochial school teachers are considered to be ministers of the faith-- instruction in religious truth and values is infused in all parts of the curriculum. The Pennsylvania federal district court denied defendants' the motion for summary judgment, saying in part:

Although the Supreme Court refused to provide a bright line test for a determination of when someone is accorded ministerial status, Defendants’ argument – that all teachers are considered to be ministers by Defendants – was not enough, in and of itself, for the high court in Hosanna-Tabor.

German Home School Family That Was Denied SCOTUS Review Gets Deferred Status From DHS

Fox News reports that in a surprising development yesterday, one day after the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in the home schooling asylum case of Romeike v. Holder (see prior posting), the Department of Homeland Security granted "indefinite deferred status" to the Romeike family. This means that the German family which home schools its children largely because of the family's Christian religious beliefs will not be deported back to Germany where laws prohibit home schooling. The Romeike family who moved to Tennessee in 2008 were originally granted asylum in 2010, but government appeals of the immigration judge's ruling led to a reversal.

Cert. Petition Seeks SCOTUS Review of Latest Mt.Soledad Cross Decision Ahead of 9th Circuit

A petition for certiorari before judgment (full text) was filed yesterday with the U.S. Supreme Court in Mt. Soledad Memorial Association v. Trunk, asking the Court to review the latest decision in the long-running case prior to the 9th Circuit hearing arguments or deciding the latest appeal. Petitioners are seeking review of a December federal district court order requiring a 43-foot high cross to be removed from the now federally-owned Mt. Soledad Veterans Memorial in California. (See prior posting.) Legal challenges to the cross have worked their way up and down the courts for 25 years. Liberty Institute issued a press release announcing the filing of the petition.

Kentucky Baptists Use Second Amendment Themes To Reach the Unchurched

The Louisville Courier Journal last week reported on the Kentucky Baptist Convention's (KBC) effort to reach unchurched men through "Second Amendment Celebrations." Guns are given away as door prizes at the events at which speakers focus on hunting and opposition to gun control. KBC spokesman Roger Alford described the controversial events as "outreach to rednecks." He explained:

The day of hanging a banner in front of your church and saying you’re having a revival and expecting the community to show up is over.... You have to know the hook that will attract people, and hunting is huge in Kentucky. So we get in there and burp and scratch and talk about the right to bear arms and that stuff..... We have found that the number of unchurched men who will show up will be in direct proportion to the number of guns you give away.

Reportedly 1,678 men made "professions of faith" at 50 such events last year.

Kentucky To Hire Outside Counsel To Defend Its Refusal To Recognize Same-Sex Marriages, Over AG's Dissent

As previously reported, last month a federal district court ordered Kentucky to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions. The state quickly however filed a motion asking for a stay while it considered its options, and last Friday the court granted a stay until March 20. (Louisville Courier Journal). As reported by AP, yesterday Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway announced that he will not appeal the decision or seek further stays. In a statement (full text) posted on the Attorney General's website, he said that the federal court's decision was correct and that he should not be wasting state resources on a case the state is unlikely to win. He added that he "came to the inescapable conclusion" that defending Kentucky's refusal to recognize same-sex marriage would be defending discrimination. However moments after the Attorney General's announcement, Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear announced (full text) that the state will hire other counsel to seek a further stay and pursue an appeal to the 6th Circuit in order to "bring certainty and finality to this important matter." [Thanks to Tom Rutledge for the lead.]

Tuesday, March 04, 2014

European Court of Human Rights Upholds British Refusal To Treat Mormon Temple As Place of Public Worship For Tax Purposes

In Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints v. United Kingdom, (ECHR, March 4, 2014), the European Court of Human Rights, Fourth Section, held that Britain did not violate the non-discrimination provisions of Art. 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights, nor the freedom of conscience and religion provisions of Art. 9, when it held that a Mormon Temple was subject to a reduced tax rate as a place used for charitable purposes, but was not entitled to the full exemption from property taxes that is available to places of "public religious worship." Entry to the Temple is limited to devout Church members who hold a "recommend" from the bishop. The Church's stake center, with its chapel, hall and ancillary rooms, on the same site had been granted the full exemption since entry to them was not limited. In finding no discrimination, the Court said in part:

To establish differential treatment, the applicant Church relied on the argument that, because of the nature of its doctrine, which holds that access to the temple should be restricted to its most devout members who hold a current “recommend”, the law ... provided a lower fiscal advantage to the Mormon Church than to such other faiths as to not restrict access to any of their places of worship.... [I]t is open to doubt whether the refusal to accord an exemption in respect of the applicant Church’s temple in Preston gave rise to any difference of treatment of comparable groups, given that the tax law in question applied in the same way to, and produced the same result in relation to, all religious organisations, including the Church of England in respect of its private chapels. Neither is the Court convinced that the applicant Church was in a significantly different position from other churches ... so as to call for differential treatment ..., since other faiths likewise do not allow access of the public to certain of their places of worship for doctrinal reasons.

Law & Religion UK reports on the decision. [Thanks To Paul DeMello, Jr. for the lead.]

Judicial Conduct Board Convicts Magistrate For Insisting On Child's Name Change

Reuters reports that yesterday a 6-person panel of the Tennessee Judicial Board of Conduct found former child-support magistrate Lu Ann Ballew guilty on charges of violating judicial canons regarding impartiality and bias. The charges stem from a case in which she insisted that parents change their child's first name from "Messiah" to "Martin" because only Jesus should be called "Messiah." She has already been fired from her position as magistrate because of her conduct. (See prior posting.) The panel will be releasing a written opinion in the case later.

North Korea Releases Australian Christian Missionary After He Signs Apology

According to yesterday's International Business Times, the North Korean government has released 75-year old missionary John Short after he signed a confession asking forgiveness for his "insult to the Korean people on February 16" when he distributed Korean-language Christian Bible tracts at a Buddhist temple. Short, an Australian, lives in Hong Kong. The North Korean Central News Agency said that the government decided to expel him "in full consideration of his age." (See prior related posting.)

Monday, March 03, 2014

Supreme Court Denies Review In Home School Asylum Case

The U.S. Supreme Court today denied certiorari in Romeike v. Holder, (Docket No. 13-471, cert. den. 3/3/2014)). (Order List.) In the case, which has been widely followed by home school advocates, the 6th Circuit denied asylum to a German evangelical Christian family that sought to remain in the United States based on a fear of persecution in Germany because of Germany's ban on home schooling. (See prior posting.)

Supreme Court Grants Review In Muslim Prisoner's Challenge To Grooming Rules Barring Beards

The U.S. Supreme Court today granted certiorari in Holt v. Hobbs, (Docket No. 13-6827, cert. granted 3/3/2014). It also granted petitioner's motion to proceed in forma pauperis. (Order List.) In the case, the 8th Circuit affirmed the district court's decision upholding the grooming policy of the Arkansas Department of Corrections that allows inmates to wear trimmed mustaches but otherwise no facial hair, with quarter-inch beards permitted only for a diagnosed dermatological problem. Inmate Gregory Holt is a Muslim whose religious beliefs require him to grow a beard. He proposed that he be allowed to maintain a half-inch beard as a compromise position, to balance his religious beliefs with the prison's security needs. In its per curiam opinion, the 8th Circuit held that "defendants met their burden under RLUIPA of establishing that ADC's grooming policy was the least restrictive means of furthering a compelling penological interest." Last November, the Supreme Court took the unusual step of granting Holt (who also goes by the name Abdul Maalik Muhammad) an injunction barring Arkansas from enforcing its grooming policy against him pending disposition of Holt's cert petition and of the appeal now that review has been granted. According to SCOTUS Blog, arguments in this case will not be heard until next Fall.

UPDATE: Later in the day on March 3, the Supreme Court issued an order (full text) modifying its grant of certiorari, clarifying that the it is limited to the question of whether Arkansas' grooming policy violates RLUIPA "to the extent that it
prohibits petitioner from growing a one-half-inch beard in accordance with his religious beliefs."

University In The Middle of 1st Amendment Tussle Over Donor's Plaque

The Indianapolis Star reported last Friday on dispute between Purdue University and one of its donors:

When Michael McCracken and his wife made a $12,500 donation to Purdue’s School of Mechanical Engineering in 2012, Purdue asked the engineering graduate to provide an inscription for a conference room dedication plaque, which would be installed in the recently renovated Herrick Laboratories.

But the words McCracken chose, in honor of his parents, turned out to be controversial.

“To those who seek to better the world through the understanding of God’s physical laws and innovation of practical solutions. In honor of Dr. William ‘Ed’ and Glenda McCracken.”

Purdue rejected the proposed inscription, concerned about church-state issues. Its attorney said:

[G]iven the facts here, our status as a public institution, and the hopelessly muddled state of jurisprudence in this particular area, we could fully expect lengthy and expensive litigation that would wipe out the value of this donation many times over, and we just don’t think that’s advisable for either the donor or the university. Still, we remain open to continued discussions, as we’d much prefer to be in the mode of expressing gratitude, not disagreement, to our donors.

The University's hope of avoiding expensive litigation, however, seems unrealistic. The attorney for the McCrackens wrote the University on Feb. 26 (full text of letter) suggesting alternative language that makes it clearer that the inscription is private speech of the McCrackens. The letter concluded:

Please let us know by March 5, 2014, if you are open to discussing a potential resolution. If not, Dr. McCracken has instructed us to commence litigation to preserve the McCrackens' First Amendment right to reference "God's physical laws" on the plaque. We note that, if thismatter proceedsto litigation and Dr. McCracken prevails, the University will be responsible for his attorneys' fees.

Sunday, March 02, 2014

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Yah'Torah v. New Jersey Department of Corrections, 2014 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 346 (NJ App., Feb. 21, 2014), a New Jersey appellate court concluded that a Jewish inmate had not shown that his free exercise or RLUIPA rights were violated by the refusal of prison authorities to furnish him goat or sheep meat, grape juice, pistachio nuts, cashew nuts, honeydew melon or watermelon, onions, goat cheese, and leeks to celebrate the New Moon festival.

In Santo Mujahid Islaam v. Greco, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21866 (D NJ, Feb. 21, 2014), a New Jersey federal district court allowed an inmate to proceed with his complaint that he was denied the right to attend Muslim Friday prayer services. Other inmates named in the complaint were given the option of joining the action upon payment of filing fees.

In Toppin v. Kornegay, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21888 (E.D.N.C. Feb. 21, 2014), a North Carolina federal district court rejected a Native American inmate's claim that a search of his cell involving handling of his sacred items box violated his free exercise rights.

In Lizama v. Hendricks, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22955 (D NJ, Feb. 20, 2014), a New Jersey federal district court dismissed without prejudice an inmate's complaint that one of the defendants failed to provide him with his kosher meal.

In Winder v. Maynard, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23038 (D MD, Feb. 24, 2014), a Maryland federal district court dismissed a complaint by a Wiccan inmate that his celebration of the Samhain Feast was impaired when authorities refused to allow Wiccans to prepare and serve pork products through the prison kitchen facilities.

In Johnson v. Lowry, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23216 (ND IN, Feb. 21, 2014), an Indiana federal district court permitted a Native American inmate to move ahead with his free exercise and RLUIPA injunctive action challenging the prison's refusal to allow him to possess various religious items in his cell and to have group services.

In Buckner v. Allen, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22695 (MD AL, Feb. 24, 2014), an Alabama federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23724, Feb. 3, 2014) and dismissed a complaint by a Native American inmate alleging denial of tobacco use during religious ceremonies, interruption of ceremonies, limited use of fires and sweat lodge, allowance of gang members on ceremonial grounds, and the chaplain's desecration of religious items by touching them.

In Davis v. Pierce, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25030 (SD TX, Feb. 27, 2014), a Texas federal magistrate judge rejected Native American inmates' challenges to the ban on inmates smoking the ceremonial pipe, infrequent Native American religious services, the grooming policy and the ban on medicine bags outside of cells.

In Hodges v. Sharon, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25453 (ED CA, Feb. 26, 2014), a California federal magistrate judge permitted a Messianic Jewish inmate to proceed with his free exercise, RLUIPA and equal protection claims alleging denial of various religious practices, including weekly services and holiday celebrations.

In Godbey v. Wilson, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25436 (ED VA, Feb. 26, 2014), a Virginia federal district court dismissed complaints by an inmate who is an Asatru adherent that he is not allowed to drink alcoholic mead during religious ceremonies or wear his hlath (headband with symbols on it) outside the prison chapel.

In Begnoche v. Derose, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25580 (MD PA, Feb. 28, 2014), a Pennsylvania federal district court refused to dismiss a Native American inmate's free exercise claims against 3 defendants alleging that they failed to provide him with a spiritual advisor, denied him religious items such as prayer feathers and denied him a special food tray during the Green Corn feast celebration.

In Free v. Garcia, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25128 (WD OK, Feb. 27, 2014), an Oklahoma federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26100, Feb. 14, 2014) and dismissed claims (some with and some without prejudice) that an inmate who is a House of Yahweh adherent did not receive his requested religious meals. A motion to amend the complaint was referred back to the magistrate judge.

State Agency May Bar Employee From Selling His Religious Book During Work Time

In Okemgbo v. Washington State Department of Ecology, (ED WA, Feb. 24, 2014), a Washington federal district court upheld against a First Amendment challenge a state agency's imposing on one of its employees who had authored a book on Christianity and marriage the following work restrictions:

You are not to use your work time for any non-work activity including:

• Promoting and soliciting contributions of money, time or other donations for your non-profit organization or other non-work related activities that you are involved in

• Promoting, selling and/or distributing your book on marriage

• Promoting religious opinions, providing religious information, counseling, offers to pray.

The court concluded that: "the Department’s interest in maintaining a workplace that is free of sexual harassment, does not promote a particular religion, and which maintains some semblance of order and efficiency outweighs the Plaintiff’s interest in selling his book, promoting his religious beliefs, or running his nonprofit organization, while he is supposed to be working."

In Mexican Village, Utility Shut-Off Used To Force Protestant Families To Contribute To Local Catholic Festivals

According to a press release issued last week by Christian Solidarity Worldwide USA, in the Mexican village of Unión Juárez (in Chiapas state) 25 Protestant families who belong to the Mount Tabor Evangelical Church have had their water and electricity cut off for refusing to contribute financially to Traditionalist Catholic religious festivals in the village. The actions against the families began Feb. 11. Guards, ropes and chains have been placed around the families' homes to prevent them from reconnecting their services or receiving visitors until they pay 500 pesos (approximately $38) each. Village authorities base their demands on the Law of Uses and Customs which gives indigenous populations autonomy to exercise traditional governance forms. The families have filed a complaint with the National Commission for Human Rights.

Muslim County Worker Wins $1.2 Million In Employment Discrimination Suit

The Detroit Free Press reports that after a two-week employment discrimination trial, a federal court jury in Michigan on Thursday awarded nearly $1.2 million to Ypsilanti (MI) resident Ali Aboubaker, a Muslim. Plaintiff, a U.S. citizen originally from Tunisia who holds four advanced degrees, claims that his firing from his maintenance engineer job with Washtenaw County was based on ethnic, religious and racial discrimination. Aboubaker, who worked for the county for 17 years, says he was constantly subjected to racial and ethnic taunts-- especially focusing on his long beard-- and management did nothing about it. His suit also challenged a promotion he did not receive.

Saturday, March 01, 2014

State Department's Human Rights Report Includes International Religious Discrimination Concerns

Last Thursday, Secretary of State John Kerry released the U.S. State Department's Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2013. While the report leaves the assessment of religious liberty around the world to the State Department's annual International Religious Freedom Report, Thursday's Human Rights report covers religious discrimination concerns for each country. The report's Introduction summarized these concerns:

Religious and ethnic minorities continued to face extreme restrictions and were targets of repression by governments and subject to societal discrimination across the globe. In China, the government continued to implement repressive policies against ethnic Uighurs and Tibetans.

In Pakistan, religious minorities faced a specter of growing violence during the year, including a deadly September church bombing in Peshawar that claimed more than 80 lives and three other incidents that killed at least 244 Shia Muslims. Religious minorities also faced discriminatory laws, societal intolerance, and a lack of accountability for crimes against them.

In Iran, the government continued its egregious repression of Baha’i whose seven leaders remained in prison as did Christian pastor Saeed Abedini at year’s end. Attacks against Christians and Shia Muslims continued in Egypt as did attacks against Christians, Yezidis, Sabean Mandaeans, and other religious minorities in Iraq, often with a lack of accountability for the perpetrators. Ahmadi Muslims continued to face violence and repression in places such as Indonesia, as well as disenfranchisement in places such as Pakistan.

Anti-Semitism also remained a significant problem in 2013. According to a survey of eight European member states by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, harassment of Jews continued, with one-quarter of respondents stating they experienced some form of anti-Semitic harassment in the 12 months before the survey. In the Middle East, media occasionally contained anti-Semitic articles and cartoons, some of which glorified or denied the Holocaust and blamed all Jews for actions by the state of Israel.

Threats to religious practice also emerged during the year. For example, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe passed a non-binding resolution implying that religious male circumcision – as practiced by Jews and Muslims, and other religions – is a human rights violation.

Ukrainian Religious Organizations Impacted By Russian Actions

Not surprisingly, the rapidly developing conflict between Ukraine and Russia is impacting Ukraine's religious institutions. The Orthodox Church-- the dominant religion in Ukraine-- is split between three factions. These are the pro- Russian Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate); the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Kiev Patriarchate) which dominates Kiev and the central region of the country; and the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church whose membership is mainly in the western half of Ukraine. According to The Economnist, this past Monday Moscow moved to assure its control over the Ukrainian Church that is part of the Moscow Patriarchate:

On Monday, the ruling synod of the UOC met and named a "locum tenens" to run the institution's headquarters in Kiev because of the incapacity of its elderly leader, Metropolitan Volodymyr.... The synod said it had ascertained that Metropolitan Volodymyr was definitely too ill to carry out his duties. The new acting leader, a certain Metropolitan Onufry from the southwest of Ukraine, certainly looks, from his biography, like a man who will remain in step with Moscow....

However the synod also accepted a proposal from the Kiev Patriarchate for dialogue. Some think this is an attempt to continue to be a player should the Ukrainian government move toward creating a single national church.

Meanwhile, as reported by RIA Novosti, on Wednesday in the northern Ukrainian city of Sumy, a dozen backers of the Kiev Patriarchate attempted to seize a UOC-MP cathedral and threatened to set it on fire. Other religious groups are also responding. Yesterday's Catholic Sun reports that the Catholic bishop whose diocese includes Crimea issued a statement calling for "all believers and nonbelievers to refrain from extremism, and not to allow the fraternal bond between people living in Crimea to break."

New York Jewish Week this week reports on the uncertain situation of the Jewish community in Ukraine. There have been a few anti-Semitic incidents, including the fire bombing of a synagogue. Several outside agencies are providing aid, including funds for increased security, for the Jewish community.

Friday, February 28, 2014

Islamist Syrian Rebel Group Imposes Strict Controls On Christians In Town of Raqqa

BBC News reported yesterday that in the northern Syrian town of Raqqa, the rebel group Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) that controls the city has announced online that it is imposing new controls on Christians there. Christians must pay a special tax of 14 grams of gold, may not carry arms, may not renovate their churches, display crosses or other religious symbols outside churches, ring church bells, or pray in public. The group said that Christians must either convert to Islam or accept these conditions or else risk being killed. ISIS said 20 Christian leaders have accepted the conditions. Rival rebel groups have been fighting ISIS since last month.

$525M Default Judgment Entered Against Affiliate of Evangelist Tony Alamo

AP reports that an Arkansas trial court yesterday issued a $525 million default judgment against Twenty First Century Holiness Tabernacle Church-- an affiliate of Alamo Ministries. The judgment came in a suit by 7 women who as young girls were physically, sexually and psychologically abused by evangelist Tony Alamo. Alamo is presently serving a 175-year prison sentence for taking girls across state lines for sex. (See prior posting.) This week's default judgment gave each victim both actual and punitive damages in amounts totaling between $30 and $87 million per victim. Plaintiffs' attorney plans to register the judgment in California and begin levying on property there to satisfy the judgment.

Court Issues Final Order On Recognition of Out-of-State Same-Sex Marriages In Kentucky; Intervenors Pursuing Additional Relief

As previously reported, earlier this month a Kentucky federal district court issued an opinion holding unconstitutional Kentucky provisions that deny recognition to same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions. As reported by the Louisville Courier Journal and Insider Louisville, after a hearing on Tuesday, the court issued its final order (full text) implementing the decision (Bourke v. Beshear, (WD KY, Feb. 27, 2014)). At the hearing, the deputy attorney general told the court that he did not have authority at that time to ask for a stay of the decision, and the court's final order thus did not contain a stay pending appeal. However the state subsequently quickly filed a motion (full text) asking for a 90-day stay to "give Defendants time to determine if they will appeal the order, and the Executive Branch time to determine what actions must be taken to implement this Court’s Order if no appeal is taken."

Meanwhile, the court yesterday also allowed (full text of order) two other couples to intervene in the case to pursue their claims (full text of intervenors' complaint) that Kentucky laws banning the issuance of marriage licenses to same-sex couples are also unconstitutional. [Thanks to Tom Rutledge for the lead.]

Veterans' Memorial Design Featuring Cross Held Unconstitutional

Following on a preliminary injunction issued last July (see prior posting), this week after a bench trial a California federal district court in American Humanist Association v. City of Lake Elsinore, (CD CA, Feb. 24, 2014), held that a veterans'-memorial design approved by the Lake Elsinore (CA) City Council violates the U.S. Constitution's Establishment Clause and the California constitution's Establishment and No Preference Clauses. The memorial includes a soldier kneeling with his gun in front of a 1.4 foot cross, and a row of approximately eight additional crosses and two Stars of David behind the central cross. The court, after tracing in detail the history of the design and redesign of the proposed monument concluded that the city had not shown a predominately secular purpose for including the Latin cross in the design, and its principal effect is to advance religion. The city's contention that the multiple crosses and stars of David added in a redesign of the monument had the secular purpose of depicting a historic European World War II military cemetery was described by the court as "only a litigating position." American Humanist Association issued a press release calling attention to the decision.

Thursday, February 27, 2014

Virginia Legislature Passes Student Religious Expression Bill; Veto Expected

As reported by Metro Weekly, yesterday the Virginia General Assembly gave final passage to SB 236 which protects student religious expression in public schools. The vote was 20-18 in the Senate and 64-34 in the House of Delegates. The bill would protect voluntary student prayer and prayer gatherings before, during and after school; wearing of clothing or jewelry displaying religious messages; and expression of religious viewpoints by neutrally selected student speakers at graduation and similar events. As reported in Tuesday's Roanoke Times, Gov. Terry McAuliffe's office has said that the governor will veto the bill out of concern for its constitutionality and its unintended consequences.

UPDATE: The Washington Post reports, as expected, that Gov. McAuliffe vetoed the bill on April 4. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

9th Circuit: Court Should Order Removal of "Innocence of Muslims" From YouTube

In Garcia v. Google, Inc., (9th Cir., Feb. 26, 2014), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 decision, held that a preliminary injunction should be granted to require the controversial film "Innocence of Muslims" to be removed from YouTube. The suit was filed by Cindy Lee Garcia who acted in a portion of the film. As explained by the court:

The film’s writer and producer ...cast Garcia in a minor role [in a film with the working title "Desert Warrior."] Garcia was ... paid approximately $500 for three and a half days of filming. “Desert Warrior” never materialized. Instead, Garcia’s scene was used in an anti-Islamic film titled “Innocence of Muslims.” Garcia first saw “Innocence of Muslims” after it was uploaded to YouTube.com and she discovered that her brief performance had been partially dubbed over so that she appeared to be asking, “Is your Mohammed a child molester?”

These, of course, are fighting words to many faithful Muslims and, after the film aired on Egyptian television, there were protests that generated worldwide news coverage. An Egyptian cleric issued a fatwa, calling for the killing of everyone involved with the film, and Garcia soon began receiving death threats. She responded by taking a number of security precautions and asking that Google remove the video from YouTube.

As summarized by the court:

The panel concluded that the plaintiff established a likelihood of success on the merits of her claim of [copyright] infringement of her performance within the film because she proved that she likely had an independent interest in the performance and that the filmmaker did not own an interest as a work for hire and exceeded any implied license to use the plaintiff’s performance.

Volokh Conspiracy has an extensive analysis of the decision. (See prior related posting.)

UPDATE: On Feb. 28, the 9th Circuit issued a revised preliminary injunction (full text) making it clear that the injunction "does not preclude the posting or display of any version of “Innocence of Muslims” that does not include Cindy Lee Garcia’s performance." [Thanks to Volokh Conspiracy for the lead.]

Arizona Governor Vetoes Anti-Gay Religious Freedom Bill

As reported by the Arizona Daily Star, yesterday Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer vetoed H.B. 1062, the controversial amendments to the state's Religious Freedom Restoration Act that would, among other things, have allowed businesses to invoke religious freedom claims to refuse to serve gays and lesbians, particularly in the context of same-sex marriages. (See prior posting.) Announcing her decision at a news conference (full text of remarks), Brewer said that the bill is unneeded and "could divide Arizona in ways we cannot even imagine and no one would ever want." In her formal Veto Letter (full text), Brewer said in part:

Senate Bill 1062 ... does not seek to address a specific and present concern related to Arizona businesses. The out-of-state examples cited by proponents of the bill, while concerning, are issues not currently existing in Arizona. Furthermore, the bill is broadly worded and could result in unintended and negative consequences. The legislation seeks to protect businesses, yet the business community overwhelmingly opposes the proposed law. Moreover, some legislators that voted for the bill have reconsidered their votes and now do not want this legislation to become law.

Federal District Court Strikes Down Texas Ban On Same-Sex Marriage

Yesterday in De Leon v. Perry, (WD TX, Feb. 26, 2014), a Texas federal district court held unconstitutional Texas' statutory and constitutional bans on same-sex marriages and their prohibition on recognizing same-sex marriages performed elsewhere. Granting a preliminary injunction, the court said:

[T]oday's Court decision is not made in defiance of the great people of Texas or the Texas Legislature, but in compliance with the United States Constitution and Supreme Court precedent. Without a rational relation to a legitimate governmental purpose, state-imposed inequality can find no refuge in our United States Constitution. Furthermore, Supreme Court precedent prohibits states from passing legislation born out of animosity against homosexuals (Romer), has extended constitutional protection to the moral and sexual choices of homosexuals (Lawrence), and prohibits the federal government from treating state-sanctioned opposite-sex marriages and same-sex marriages differently (Windsor).

Applying the United States Constitution and the legal principles binding on this Court by Supreme Court precedent, the Court finds that Article I, Section 32 of the Texas Constitution and corresponding provisions of the Texas Family Code are unconstitutional. These Texas laws deny Plaintiffs access to the institution of marriage and its numerous rights, privileges, and responsibilities for the sole reason that Plaintiffs wish to be married to a person of the same sex. The Court finds this denial violates Plaintiffs' equal protection and due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

The court however stayed the execution of the preliminary injunction pending final disposition of any appeal to the 5th Circuit. According to the Dallas Morning News , state attorney general Greg Abbott says the state will appeal. Washington Post places the decision in a broader context. Texas Gov. Rick Perry yesterday issued a statement (full text) reacting to the decision, saying in part:

it is not the role of the federal government to overturn the will of our citizens. The 10th Amendment guarantees Texas voters the freedom to make these decisions, and this is yet another attempt to achieve via the courts what couldn't be achieved at the ballot box.

Protester At Center of SCOTUS Decision On Military Base Protests Was Catholic Worker Movement Adherent

Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court in United States v. Apel, (US Sup. Ct., Feb. 26, 2014), held that a federal statute which makes it a crime to re-enter a military installation after the base commander orders a person not to do so applies to a protest area at Vandenberg Air Force Base that is open to the public. The Court describes John Dennis Apel, the protester involved in the case, as an antiwar activist. It says nothing about the religious basis for Apel's protests found in his involvement in the Catholic Worker Movement. Here is some insight into Apel's religious beliefs from a Dec. 2013 article reprinted on the Pacific Life Community's website:

[Apel] and a dedicated core of volunteers — including his wife of 15 years, Tensie — provide food and clothes to the community’s poor. They run a summer children’s program and a weekly free medical clinic.

The couple are devotees of the Catholic Worker movement, a social reform cause committed to social justice, pacifism and voluntary poverty that they’ve dedicated most of their adult lives to promoting.

They receive no salary — the couple and their two young children survive on his Social Security income, as well as donations and the charity of others.

For more than a dozen years, as part of Mr. Apel’s deep peace-oriented belief system, he has regularly stood outside the gates of Vandenberg, protesting what he believes is an immoral military mission. He has been arrested 15 times, and received “ban and bar” citations that restrict his ability to protest near the classified military installation.

Wednesday, February 26, 2014

New Ukraine Acting President Turchynov Is Baptist Pastor

Christianity Today reports that Ukraine's new Acting President who took office on Sunday is not only a well-respected opposition politician, but is also a Baptist pastor. BBC reports that the interim President, Olexander Turchynov, was the top aide to former prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko (who was imprisoned by the now ousted President Viktor Yanukovych). Turchynov preaches regularly at one of the Baptist churches in Kiev. In an article today, Religion News Service speculates:

Acting President Oleksandr Turchynov is neither Ukrainian Orthodox nor Eastern Rite Catholic, and that may be the key to his success at a time when fissures between East and West are threatening to split the country,

Missouri County Treasurer Will Accept Same-Sex Marriages From Other States In Unclaimed Property Claims

According to Monday's Columbia Daily Tribune, in Boone County, Missouri (which includes Columbia) County Treasurer Nicole Galloway has announced she will recognized same-sex marriages from out of state. This means that after the death of a spouse, a surviving same-sex spouse can obtain unclaimed property of the deceased being held by the county. The county treasurer took the step despite the provision in Sec. 33 of the Missouri Constitution that provides: "That to be valid and recognized in this state, a marriage shall exist only between a man and a woman." Galloway said: "In Boone County and in my office, we accept legal documents from every state in America, and this is just an extension of that." [Thanks to Alliance Alert for the lead.]

Lesbian Employee Forced To Watch Religious Anti-Gay Video Loses Claim For Harassment

As reported by the Santa Rosa Press Democrat, a Sonoma County, California trial court yesterday issued a tentative decision (full text) in White v. GC Micro Corp., (Cal. Super. Ct., Feb. 25, 2014). Plaintiff in the case, a lesbian in a committed domestic partnership, was recruited by GC Micro's CEO to move from Colorado to California to work for the company. She was fired after 5 months. The supervisor in charge of training sales staff made derogatory remarks about plaintiff's sexual orientation and lifestyle, and required her to watch a video featuring a minister who had "outspoken disdain for homosexuality" and believed "that all homosexuals are sinners." However, according to the court, plaintiff "does not allege that the video contained any inappropriate material." The court allowed plaintiff to move ahead with a sexual orientation discrimination claim and a fraud claim against the company, but dismissed with leave to amend the claims against the CEO and supervisor personally. The court dismissed completely plaintiff's claim for harassment.

Suit Challenges World War I Memorial Cross

A humanist organization and three individuals yesterday filed suit challenging the constitutionality of a 40-foot tall cross erected nearly 90 years ago as a memorial to those killed in World War I. The cross is located on a median between roadways in Bladensburg, Maryland. The complaint (full text) in American Humanist Association v. Maryland- National Capital Park and Planning Commission, (D MD, filed 2/25/2014) contends that the county's:

ownership, maintenance and prominent display on public property of the Bladensburg Cross amounts to the endorsement and advancement of religion (and, specifically, an endorsement of and affiliation with Christianity) in violation of the Establishment Clause.

American Humanist Association issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Universities In Crossfire Over Bibles In Hotel Rooms

Two state universities find themselves in the cross fire of rival advocacy groups over the issue of Gideon Bibles in the night stands at university hotels and conference centers. The Blaze reported yesterday that after complaints by the Freedom from Religion Foundation, Iowa State University's Hotel Memorial Union agreed to remove bibles from in-room night stands and place them instead in its downstairs library and reading room. The University of Wisconsin-Extension also agreed to remove bibles from guest rooms in its conference center. Now however Alliance Defending Freedom has told both universities that the 1st Amendment does not require them to remove the Bibles, and doing so amounts to viewpoint discrimination.

Greek Jews Sue Germany In European Court For Return of Ransom Paid To Nazis

AP reports that the Jewish community of Thessaloniki, Greece last week filed an appeal with the European Court of Human Rights in a suit against Germany seeking to recover the $69 million in ransom paid in 1942 to Nazi occupiers for the release of thousands of Jewish men aged 18-45 who were forced as slave laborers to work on construction projects across Greece. Soon after their release, the city's entire Jewish population was sent to German death camps anyway. Greece's Supreme Court dismissed the lawsuit last year on jurisdictional grounds.

Obama Criticizes Uganda President's Signing of Anti-Gay Law

As he said he would, yesterday Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni signed into law a harsh Anti-Homosexuality bill. CNN reports that at the public signing of the bill, Museveni said he would not allow the West to impose its values on Uganda. In response, the White House issued a statement (full text) reading in part:

Instead of standing on the side of freedom, justice, and equal rights for its people, today, regrettably, Ugandan President Museveni took Uganda a step backward by signing into law legislation criminalizing homosexuality. As President Obama has said, this law is more than an affront and a danger to the gay community in Uganda, it reflects poorly on the country's commitment to protecting the human rights of its people and will undermine public health, including efforts to fight HIV/AIDS....

Court Rules That Illinois Same Sex Couples Can Wed Immediately In Cook County

In Lee v. Orr, (ND IL, Feb. 21, 2014), an Illinois federal district court, in a 4-page opinion, held that Illinois statutes barring same-sex marriages violate the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause by discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation. Illinois has already enacted a law allowing same-sex marriages, but that law does not take effect until June 1. (See prior posting.) In this decision, however, the court ruled that same-sex couples need not wait for June:

There is no reason to delay further when no opposition has been presented to this Court and committed gay and lesbian couples have already suffered from the denial of their fundamental right to marry.

However because the suit was filed only against the Cook County Clerk, the court's decision applies only to marriage licenses issued by Cook County. The Chicago Tribune reports that same-sex couples began lining up for marriage licenses within an hour after the ruling was issued.

Temporary Injunction Issued Stopping North Carolina School Voucher Program

According to the Lincoln (NC) Times-News, after a hearing last Friday, a North Carolina trial court judge issued a temporary injunction barring the state (at least for the time being) from moving ahead with a lottery to choose families to receive school vouchers for use at private schools next year. The state has received over 4,700 applications for the 2,400 vouchers that would be awarded to income-eligible families. According to the Times-News report:

Friday’s arguments focused on what the state constitution allows and whether the legislature improperly took money away from the state’s public schools to give to private schools. Opponents of the bill have argued that vouchers would send money to schools that discriminate based on religion or disability.

One school that has come under fire is Raleigh Christian Academy, which requires its students and parents to sign a contract stating they are in 100 percent agreement with its fundamental doctrinal practices. Their school application states, “we are not a church school for those in cults, i.e. Mormons, Jehovah’s Witness, Christian Science, Unification Church, Zen Buddhism, Unitarianism, and United Pentecostal.”

(See prior related posting.)

Missouri Catholic Diocese Settles Two Abuse Lawsuits

Last week, the Catholic Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph settled two separate state court lawsuits stemming from the child pornography activities of priest Shawn Ratigan. AP reports that last Friday a court approved a settlement of $1.275 million in a suit brought by parents whose daughter was photographed in nude and semi-nude poses by Ratigan when the girl was 10 to 12 years old. A $525,000 settlement in a second suit was approved last Wednesday in a suit involving a girl who was photographed by Ratigan when the girl was 9 years old. In each of the suits, thejudge also entered a $500,000 default judgment against Ratigan who was sentenced to 50 years in prison last year. In 2012 Bishop Robert Finn was convicted of a misdemeanor for failing to authorities his suspicion of child abuse by Ratigan. Finn was sentenced to two years probation. (See prior posting.)

Monday, February 24, 2014

Arizona Legislature Passes RFRA Amendments To Allow Businesses To Refuse To Serve Gays On Religious Grounds

The Arizona legislature on Thursday passed and sent to the governor SB 1062 which amends the state's Religious Freedom Restoration Act to extend its coverage to the exercise of religion by corporations and other business organizations. The bill also provides that its protections may be asserted in lawsuits even if the government is not a party. (Background form Arizona Center for Policy.) The controversial bill is designed to permit businesses that oppose homosexuality or same-sex marriage on religious grounds to refuse to provide goods or services if it violates their religious beliefs. ABC News reports that Gov. Jan Brewer is still deciding whether or not to sign the bill. Some suggest that if the controversial bill becomes law, it could lead to boycotts in connection with the Super Bowl scheduled for Arizona next year. AP reports further on the legislation.

Professor Loses On Claim of Retaliation For Religious Speech Aimed At Students

In Payne v. University of South Mississippi, (SD MI, Feb. 21, 2014), a Mississippi federal district court held that the 1st Amendment does not preclude a faculty member at a public university being disciplined for religious speech made as part of his duties as a professor. According to the court:

A graduate student employed in a program administered by Plaintiff ... complained: “Sometimes during conversations with Dr. Payne, religion or Bible verses are usually brought up by him in some way. This makes me and others very uncomfortable. . . . While in Scotland with CJA staff, Dr. Payne made the statement that anyone who is not a Christian is going to hell.” She continued: “I have been told to go pray about certain issues when they are being discussed with Dr. Payne numerous times. . . . I do not feel comfortable when told to go pray from my supervisor instead of dealing with the situation.”

The court dismissed plaintiff's 1st Amendment retaliation claim.

Sunday, February 23, 2014

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Howard v. Connett, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19231 (D NV, Feb. 14, 2014), a Nevada federal district court refused to grant summary judgment to defendants on an inmate's claims that Nation of Islam services are held only once monthly and he is not released regularly for other Muslim services[ on his claim that he was deprived of his Qur'an for 12 days while in disciplinary segregation; and on his claim of a conspiracy to deprive him of medical treatment based on animus toward his religion.

In Hoeck v. Miklich, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20381 (D CO, Feb. 19, 2014), a Colorado federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations in part and allowed an inmate to proceed with his claims against certain defendants complaining that the practices of his "Biblical Christian" faith were not accommodated.

In Karsjens v. Jesson, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20911 (D MN, Feb. 19, 2014), a Minnesota federal district court allowed plaintiffs to proceed with their claim that portions of the Minnesota civil commitment sex offender program violate their free exercise rights. Plaintiffs claim they are monitored during religious services and private meetings with clergy, are not allowed to wear religious apparel or have certain religious property, are not allowed communal religious feasts and cannot receive Kosher or Halal meals.

In Rahman v. Fischer, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20846 (ND NY, Feb. 20, 2014), a New York federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation and dismissed a number of claims but permitted a Muslim inmate to proceed with his complaint that he was denied access to the sink to make ablution.

In Pelayo v. Hernandez, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20616 (ND CA, Feb. 18, 2014), a California federal district court dismissed with leave to amend an inmate's complaint that he was prevented from entering the dining hall at breakfast because he was carrying a pocket Bible and thin Bible folder.

In Walker v. Artus, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21745 (ND NY, Feb. 21, 2014), a New York federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations and dismissed a complaint that Muslim inmates in the special housing unit are not allowed to attend congregate religious services, nor are they allowed to watch or listen through closed circuit transmissions.

7th Circuit Affirms Denial of Preliminary Injunction to Notre Dame In Contraceptive Coverage Challenge

In University of Notre Dame v. Sebelius, (7th Cir., Feb. 21, 2014), the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday, in a 2-1 decision, denied a preliminary injunction to Notre Dame University in its challenge to the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage mandate as applied to religious non-profits. Handing down its decision only 9 days after hearing oral arguments, the majority in an opinion by Judge Posner affirmed the district court, saying in part:

We imagine that what the university wants is an order forbidding Aetna and Meritain to provide any contraceptive coverage to Notre Dame staff or students pending final judgment in the district court. But we can’t issue such an order; neither Aetna nor Meritain is a defendant (the university’s failure to join them as defendants puzzles us)..... Furthermore, while a religious institution has a broad immunity from being required to engage in acts that violate the tenets of its faith, it has no right to prevent other institutions, whether the government or a health insurance company, from engaging in acts that merely offend the institution..

If the government is entitled to require that female contraceptives be provided to women free of charge, we have trouble understanding how signing the form that declares Notre Dame’s authorized refusal to pay for contraceptives for its students or staff, and mailing the authorization document to those companies, which under federal law are obligated to pick up the tab, could be thought to “trigger” the provision of female contraceptives....

The novelty of Notre Dame’s claim—not for the exemption, which it has, but for the right to have it without having to ask for it—deserves emphasis. United States law and public policy have a history of accommodating religious beliefs.... What makes this case and others like it involving the contraception exemption paradoxical and virtually unprecedented is that the beneficiaries of the religious exemption are claiming that the exemption process itself imposes a substantial burden on their religious faiths. The closest analogues we have found are cases in which churches seeking rezoning or variances claim that the process for obtaining permission is so cumbersome as to constitute a substantial burden on religious practice....

The process of claiming one’s exemption from the duty to provide contraceptive coverage is the opposite of cumbersome. It amounts to signing one’s name and mailing the signed form to two addresses. Notre Dame may consider the process a substantial burden, but substantiality—like compelling governmental interest—is for the court to decide.

The majority also rejected Notre Dame's establishment clause challenge, and left its free speech challenge for further development in the district court.

Judge Flaum dissenting said in part:

Having to submit the EBSA Form 700, Notre Dame maintains, makes it “complicit in a grave moral wrong” by involving it with a system that delivers contraceptive products and services to its employees and students.

The majority has trouble accepting this position, in part due to the university’s statement that its signature will “trigger” contraceptive coverage, because the majority understands federal law to require contraceptive coverage regardless of what Notre Dame signs or does not sign.... Yet we are judges, not moral philosophers or theologians; this is not a question of legal causation but of religious faith. Notre Dame tells us that Catholic doctrine prohibits the action that the government requires it to take. So long as that belief is sincerely held, I believe we should defer to Notre Dame’s understanding.

Wall Street Journal reports on the decision.

Friday, February 21, 2014

Oregon Will Not Defend Its Same-Sex Marriage Ban In Pending Litigation

In its answer filed yesterday in Geiger v. Kitzhaber, a suit challenging Oregon's same-sex marriage ban, Oregon officials notified the federal district court:

State Defendants will not defend the Oregon ban on same-sex marriage in this litigation. Rather, they will take the position in their summary judgment briefing that the ban cannot withstand a federal constitutional challenge under any standard of review. In the meantime, as the State Defendants are legally obligated to enforce the Oregon Constitution’s ban on same-sex marriage, they will continue to do so unless and until this Court grants the relief sought by the plaintiffs.

The lawsuit was filed last October. (See prior posting.) SCOTUSblog reports on Oregon's decision not to defend its ban.

UAE Fatwa Committee Says Mars Settlement Proposal Violates Islamic Law

Last year, a Dutch company, Mars One, announced plans to establish a permanent human colony on Mars. Plans are for the first volunteers to fly there in 2023, with others following every two years. No technology currently exists to bring the colonizers back to earth. This week the Khaleej Times reports that a fatwa committee under the General Authority of Islamic Affairs and Endowment in the United Arab Emirates has ruled that promoting or participating in the one-way trips violates Islamic law:

“Such a one-way journey poses a real risk to life, and that can never be justified in Islam,” the committee said. “There is a possibility that an individual who travels to planet Mars may not be able to remain alive there, and is more vulnerable to death.”

Whoever opts for this “hazardous trip”, the committee said, is likely to perish for no “righteous reason”, and thus will be liable to a “punishment similar to that of suicide in the Hereafter”.

Some 500 Saudis and other Arabs are among those who have already applied to take part in the mission.

Court Dismisses Challenge To NYPD's Surveillance of Muslims

In Hassan v. City of New York, (D NJ, Feb. 20, 2014), a New Jersey federal district court dismissed a constitutional challenge to the New York City Police Department's surveillance of the Muslim community in New Jersey following 9/11. Plaintiffs claimed that the surveillance was motivated solely by animus against Muslims. The court concluded first that plaintiffs lack standing because they did not allege a sufficient injury from the surveillance. The alleged injury to reputations and to the religious functioning of various organizations was caused by the AP's unauthorized release of documents about the program, not by the NYPD's surveillance. The court also concluded that plaintiffs failed to show intentional discrimination:

Plaintiffs in this case have not alleged facts from which it can be plausibly inferred that they were targeted solely because of their religion. The more likely explanation for the surveillance was a desire to locate budding terrorist conspiracies. The most obvious reason for so concluding is that surveillance of the Muslim community began just after the attacks of September 11, 2001.

The Center for Constitutional Rights issued a press release reacting to the decision. AP reports on the decision.

Los Angeles Archdiocese Settles Remaining Clergy Abuse Cases For $13 Million

As reported by KPCC News, earlier this week the Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles agreed to settle the 17 clergy abuse lawsuits remaining against it for a total of $13 million. Eleven of the suits involve charges relating to Mexican priest Nicolas Aguilar Rivera who molested at least 26 boys in his 10 months in Los Angeles and then fled before the Archdiocese notified police about complaints against him. Cardinal Roger Mahoney who headed the Archdiocese at the time of the molestations and is now retired was sanctioned last year by his successor after released files showed he was involved in shielding accused priests from law enforcement authorities. (See prior posting.) The KPPC article includes a link to Augilar Rivera's full personnel file.

Thursday, February 20, 2014

North Korea Detains Christian Missionary For Distributing Gospel Tracts

London's The Telegraph reported yesterday that North Korea has detained a 75-year old Christian missionary for distributing Korean language gospel tracts that he had written. He could face up to 15 years in prison for his actions. The missionary, John Short, is an Australian who lives with his family in Hong Kong and is a member of The Gospel Hall brethren. This was his second trip to North Korea. Short's wife told the press: "We're faith missionaries and he believed that we should care and not just talk but do something… Ultimately, we're in God's hands and that's how we look at it."

India's Supreme Court Says Country's Adoption Law Applies To Muslims

In Hashmi v. Union of India, (Sup. Ct. India, Feb. 19, 2014), a 3-judge panel of the Supreme Court of India held that the Juvenile Justice (Care And Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (background), allows a parent of any religion to adopt an eligible child. The Court described the Juvenile Justice Act as a "small step" toward a uniform Civil Code envisioned by Art. 44 of the Indian Constitution. The Court rejected the argument of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board that Child Welfare Committees should follow the principles of Islamic law before declaring a Muslim child available for adoption. Islamic law recognizes the Kafala system under which a child in need remains a descendant of its biological parents even though it is placed under the care of others. Because of these differing views on adoption, however, the court refused to declare adoption a fundamental right under Art. 21 of the Indian Constitution. Calcutta's The Telegraph reports on the decision.

Faith Healing Parents Get 3 1/2 to 7 Years In Death of Child

In Philadelphia yesterday, Herbert and Catherine Schaible were sentenced to three and one-half to seven years in prison in the faith-healing death from pneumonia of their 8-month old son last year. The couple pleaded no-contest to third degree murder charges in the case. At the time of the death, the couple were already on 10-years probation for the similar death of another of their children for whom they failed to seek medical treatment. (See prior posting.) The couple belong to the First Century Gospel Church which teaches that illness is to be healed through prayer. AP reports that the prosecution had asked for sentences of 8 to 16 years:

“It was so foreseeable to me that this was going to happen,” said Assistant District Attorney Joanne Pescatore, who prosecuted both cases. “Everybody in the system failed these children.”

After the first death, she and public defender Mythri Jayaraman agreed that the couple’s beliefs were so ingrained that their children remained at risk. They asked the earlier judge to have the family supervised by a Department of Human Services caseworker. Instead, the judge assigned them to probation officers, who are not trained to monitor children’s welfare.

In sentencing the couple, Judge Benjamin Lerner told them: "You’ve killed two of your children. ... Not God. Not your church. Not religious devotion. You."

Group Homes Ordered Closed After Charges That Disabled Residents Were Punished For Refusing To Attend Religious Services

The Los Angeles Times reports that last Friday a California trial court judge appointed a receiver to begin relocating dozens of physically and mentally disabled residents from two unlicensed religiously-operated group homes. Husband and wife, Kang Won Lee and Jung Hwan Lee, operate the two Los Angeles facilities, Agape Mission House and Agape Home Church. Los Angeles authorities say living conditions in the homes were deplorable. They also say that residents were forced to attend religious services twice a day, regardless of their religious beliefs. If they refused, they were punished by being required to stand by a tree for up to 4 hours, translate Bible verses for a full day and sleep outside at night.

MLK Bible and Medal ordered Under Court Control While Litigation Is Pending

A Georgia state trial court has issued a preliminary ruling in the lawsuit between the children of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. over control of his Nobel Peace Prize and his famous "traveling" Bible. Bernice King is seeking to prevent her two brothers (who control the King estate) from selling the two items over her dissenting vote. The estate has sued to force Bernice (who currently controls the items) to turn them over. (See prior posting.) According to Reuters, yesterday the judge, saying there is a likelihood the estate will win its lawsuit, ordered the items moved to a single bank safe-deposit box with the judge controlling the keys to it.

Marijuana DUI Law Does Not Injure Religious User of Cannabis

In Baker v. State of Colorado, (D CO, Feb. 18, 2014), a Colorado federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (Feb. 7, 2014) and dismissed for lack of standing a free exercise challenge to Colorado's marijuana DUI statute. The magistrate's conclusion, adopted by the district court, was:

Plaintiff alleges that Colorado's marijuana DUI statute violates his First Amendment right to free exercise of religion because it infringes on his right to (1) personally use cannabis for medical and sacramental purposes and (2) run a church that uses cannabis in its religious practices.... Plaintiff does not allege facts indicating that his religion specifically necessitates marijuana use resulting in five ngs or more of Delta 9-THC in his bloodstream while driving a car. Therefore, Plaintiff fails to allege facts showing that Colorado's marijuana DUI statute has unconstitutionally burdened his religious practices.... Accordingly, he fails to allege an injury in fact in connection with his First Amendment claim.

Court Says Parents Who Lost Custody of Child Have Only Limited Control Over Child's Religious Exposure

In In re T.K, (OH Ct.. App., Feb. 19, 2014), an Ohio appeals court held that when legal custody of a child is given to the child's grandparents, there are limits on the extent to which the child's mother can dictate the boy's religious upbringing. The boy was originally placed with the grandparents when he tested positive for marijuana at birth, and custody was made permanent 9 months later with the parents' consent. However the boy's mother objected to the grandparents raising her son in their Catholic faith. An Ohio statute (RC 2151.353(A)(3)(c)) provides that when legal custody is transferred, parents retain the residual "privilege to determine the child's religious affiliation."

The court of appeals upheld the trial court's implementation of the mother's preference by an order providing that "the grandparents not engage the child in church activities or rituals designed for ... membership, including those required for membership into the Catholic Church." The mother had wanted a broader order prohibiting the grandparents from in any way, teaching, indoctrinating, or actively exposing the child to any religion, Catholic or otherwise. The court however focused on the statute's use of the term "affiliation" and agreed with the trial court that exposure to religion is not tantamount to affiliation.

Wednesday, February 19, 2014

Upcoming Conferences and Survey

Here are several items that may be of particular interest to law school faculty members, lawyers and policy makers:

The 5th annual Religious Legal Theory conference is being held this year at Emory University Law School on Feb. 24-25, hosted by its Center for the Study of Law and Religion. This year's theme is "A Global Conversation: Exploring Interfaith and International Models for the Interaction of Religion and State." More details are available at the Center's website.

On April 3-5, Harvard Law School is hosting a conference titled "Religious Accommodation in the Age of Civil Rights." The conference is co-sponsored by Harvard Law School, Williams Institute, ACLU, and USC Center for Law, History and Culture. More details are available online at Harvard Law School's website.

Prof. Faisal Kutty, with the endorsement of the AALS Section on Islamic Law, is conducting a survey on Teaching of Islamic Law In North American Law Schools. The online survey is available from this link.