7th Circuit: Church Lacks Standing To Appeal Injunction Against City On Cross Display

In Cabral v. City of Evansville, Indiana, (7th Cir., June 25, 2014), the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed for lack of standing an appeal of an Indiana federal district court's injunction barring Evansville from permitting a church's proposed display of 31 six-foot tall crosses on 4-block Riverfront area. The district court concluded that the display would violate the Establishment Clause. (See prior posting.) The city of Evansville did not appeal; the church involved (West Side Christian) which had been an intervenor in the case below did.  The 7th Circuit concluded that since the injunction ran only against the city, vacating it would not necessarily remedy any injury West Side suffered.  The city could still refuse to permit the display. In addition, any decision the 7th Circuit made on the merits would affect only the city which is not a party to the appeal.  The court concluded that in order to obtain standing, West Side would need to apply for a permit and have it denied by the city because of the district court's injunction.  The 7th Circuit then added:

We caution, however, that West Side’s road ahead might not necessarily get any easier if it ever attains standing to challenge the injunction. We question whether a reasonable observer would be put on notice that the “Cross the River” display is strictly private speech given the sheer magnitude of a display that takes up four blocks and has two signs alerting citizens that it is a private display.

Indiana's Same-Sex Marriage Ban Invalidated; Motion for Stay, Appeal Filed As Some Counties Issue Licenses

In Baskin v. Bogan, (SD IN, June 25, 2014), an Indiana federal district court held that Indian's ban on same-sex marriage, and on recognizing same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions, is unconstitutional. The court found that the ban infringes the fundamental right to marry protected by the due process clause, and discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation in violation of the equal protection clause, adding:

The court has never witnessed a phenomenon throughout the federal court system as is presented with this issue. In less than a year, every federal district court to consider the issue has reached the same conclusion in thoughtful and thorough opinions – laws prohibiting the celebration and recognition of same-sex marriages are unconstitutional. It is clear that the fundamental right to marry shall not be deprived to some individuals based solely on the person they choose to love. In time, Americans will look at the marriage of couples, such as Plaintiffs, and refer to it simply as marriage-- not as same-sex marriage.  These couples, when gender and sexual orientation are taken away, are in all respects like the family down the street. The Constitution demands that we treat them as such.

The Indianapolis Star reports that county clerks in several counties began issuing licenses for same-sex marriages yesterday. As reported by WTHR, Indiana's Attorney General quickly filed an emergency motion for a stay pending appeal (full text) and a notice of appeal to the 7th Circuit (full text). Two county clerks' offices also filed notices of appeal. Meanwhile the Attorney General contacted all counties stating that while only the five county clerks named in the lawsuits are required to comply with the court's order, everyone should "show respect for the judge and the orders that are issued."

10th Circuit Says Utah's Same-Sex Marriage Ban Is Unconstitutional

In Kitchen v. Herbert, (10th Cir., June 25, 2014), the U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in a 2-1 decision struck down Utah's ban on same-sex marriage, but stayed its mandate pending disposition of any appeal. The majority summarized its 66-page opinion:

We hold that the Fourteenth Amendment protects the fundamental right to marry, establish a family, raise children, and enjoy the full protection of a state’s marital laws. A state may not deny the issuance of a marriage license to two persons, or refuse to recognize their marriage, based solely upon the sex of the persons in the marriage union.

Among the justifications rejected by the court was Utah's argument that allowing same-sex marriage "would create the potential for religious-related strife."  Judge Kelly dissenting in part argued that there is no fundamental right to same-gender marriage.

The Salt Lake Tribune reports on the decision. In a statement released yesterday, the Utah attorney general's office says it will file a petition for certiorari seeking Supreme Court review.

Seattle Archdiocese Reaches $12.1 Million Settlement With Abuse Claimants

Reuters reported yesterday that the Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle has agreed to settle claims brought by 30 men who were sexually abused 30 to 60 years ago in two diocesan high schools staffed by the Christian Brothers of Ireland teaching order. The lawsuits alleged that the Archdiocese failed to shield the victims from known abusers.  According to a press release from the Archdiocese, the $12.1 million settlement was funded by archdiocesan insurance programs. The Christian Brothers previously reached a $16.5 million settlement with 400 victims.

9th Circuit Denies En Banc Review On Strict Scrutiny For Sexual Orientation Classifications

Earlier this week, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to grant en banc review to an earlier decision by a 3-judge panel that concluded heightened scrutiny must be applied to equal protection claims based on sexual orientation. In SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. Abbott Laboratories, (9th Cir., June 24, 2014), the court reported that the call for en banc review did not receive a majority vote.  However Judge O'Scannlain, joined by Judges Bybee and Bee, filed a dissent to the refusal to review, saying in part:

This case ... came to our court in the posture of an appeal from a simple juror selection ruling during trial. Sadly, it has morphed into a constitutional essay about equal protection and sexual orientation.... The opinion’s unprecedented application of heightened scrutiny to a peremptory strike of a juror who was perceived to be gay bears significant implications for the same-sex marriage debate and for other laws that may give rise to distinctions based on sexual orientation.

Indeed, today’s opinion is the only appellate decision since United States v. Windsor ... to hold that lower courts are “required by Windsor to apply heightened scrutiny to classifications based on sexual orientation for purposes of equal protection.” ... Such holding is wrong, egregiously so. Because of the danger that district courts will be misled by the opinion’s sweeping misinterpretation of Windsor, it is most unfortunate that we denied rehearing en banc.

SCOTUS Blog has more on the decision.

White House Hosts Global LGBT Human Rights Forum

The White House yesterday hosted the first Global Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Human Rights Forum. It brought together religious leaders along with LGBT and HIV activists, human rights advocates and the private sector. A Fact Sheet issued by the White House reviews the international initiatives that the government has taken to protect LGBT rights. National Security Advisor Susan Rice addressed the Forum. (Full text of remarks.) Asserting that "cultural differences do not excuse human rights violations," Rice later asked: "For the faith community, how can we reinforce to religious groups that God loves all the children of his creation equally?"

Zoning Denial For Catholic School Athletic Field Lighting Violates RLUIPA

In Corporation of the Catholic Archbishop of Seattle v. City of Seattle, WD WA, June 20, 2014), a Washington federal district court held that requiring a Catholic High School to obtain a zoning variance in order to install 70-foot tall light poles in its athletic field violates the "equal terms" provision of RLUIPA. The variance, which was denied, is required because of the 30-foot height requirement for structures in residential zones. The city exempts public school athletic fields from the height requirement. [Thanks to Eric Treene for the lead.]

Congress Passes World War II Memorial Prayer Act

Congress this week gave final approval and sent to the President for his signature S. 1044, the World War II Memorial Prayer Act. The Act calls for an addition to the World War II Memorial in Washington, D.C.  A plaque or inscription containing the words of the prayer that President Franklin Roosevelt delivered on D-Day is to be  installed-- using only private contributions to pay for it. According to the Columbus Dispatch last week, the ACLU calls the law needlessly divisive.

Court Decides Dispute Over Proceeds From Sale of Church Property

In Pacific Southwest District of the Church of the Brethren v. Church of the Brethren, Inc., (CA App., June 23, 2014), a California appeals court dealt with a dispute over sharing of the proceeds from the sale of church property.  The court summarized its holding:

Pacific Southwest District of the Church of the Brethren (PSWD) ... appeal from a judgment in favor of respondents Central Korean Evangelical Church (CKEC) and its pastor Jang Kyun Park. The judgment gave CKEC an 86-percent share and gave PSWD a 14-percent share in the proceeds from any sale of CKEC’s real property, which consists of three lots in the Koreatown neighborhood of Los Angeles. Appellants argue CKEC holds the property in trust for the Church of the Brethren. We conclude that PSWD is estopped from asserting a trust over the entire property because CKEC joined the denomination on assurances by church representatives that a trust would not apply to property it owned at the time of affiliation, and at that time it already owned two of the three lots. We also conclude that PSWD may assert a trust over the after-acquired third lot. We affirm the judgment to the extent it ordered partition of the property by sale, but reverse and remand for a redetermination of each party’s share in the proceeds from any sale.

Jury Service Does Not Violate Free Exercise Rights

In Bey v. City of Philadelphia, (ED PA, June 17, 2014), plaintiff sued unsuccessfully for $2 million in damages after the city's Jury Selection Commission denied him an exemption from jury duty which he sought because of his religious beliefs and political views. The court concluded that his free exercise claim is legally frivolous because the state's jury service laws are neutral and generally applicable, and are clearly related to the legitimate objective of maintaining a jury system.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Powers v. Coleman, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 11667 (7th Cir., June 20, 2014), the 7th Circuit refused to overturn a jury's verdict that a Messianic Jewish inmate did not have a sincere religious belief that he needed a kosher diet.

In Sharrieff v. Moore, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 82460 (MD PA, June 16, 2014), a Pennsylvania federal district court dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies a complaint seeking separate religious services and a separate fast during December for Nation of Islam inmates.

In Oliver v. Adams, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80519 (ED CA, June 10, 2014), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed, with leave to amend, a complaint by an inmate who is an adherent of Shetaut Neter who claims he is being denied a prayer rug, a religious diet, worship services, and religious programming on in-house television while he is in the special housing unit.

In Davis v. Abercrombie, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81780 (D HI, June 13, 2014), a Hawaii federal district court in a very long opinion dealt with claims by Native Hawaiian inmates housed at private prisons in Arizona that their free exercise, RLUIPA and equal protection rights are being infringed as to their daily worship practices, the observance of Makahiki, and access to sacred items, sacred space and a spiritual advisor. The court held that there are genuine issues of fact remaining as to various of the claims.

In Adkins v. Shinn, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81953 (D HI, June 16, 2014), a Hawaii federal district court dismissed a Muslim inmate's complaints about lack of visits from an Imam an difficulty in obtaining a Qur'an, other books and a kufi. However the court permitted him to proceed on his complaint that a kosher diet was substituted for his halal diet.

Pregnancy Service Center Signage Requirement Held Void-For-Vagueness

In Austin LifeCare, Inc. v. City of Austin, (WD TX, June 23, 2014), a Texas federal district court struck down as void for vagueness an Austin, Texas ordinance that requires unlicensed pregnancy service centers that do not have full-time licensed health care providers on site to post signs to indicate whether the center provides medical services and if the services are provided under supervision of a licensed health care provider. The ordinance covers centers that offer pregnancy testing or perform sonograms and then offer options counseling. The court concluded that neither "full time" nor "medical services" is adequately defined in the ordinance. Austin American-Statesman reports on the decision.

Sudanese Appeals Court Overturns Apostasy Death Sentence of Christian Woman

In a case that has attracted widespread international attention, an appeals court in Sudan has ordered the release of Meriam Ibrahim who had been sentenced to death for apostasy. Mail Online reports that a Khartoun appeals court overturned the death sentence of the 27-year old woman who was charged with converting from Islam to Christianity.  Ibrahim's father was Muslim, but her mother was Christian and she was raised as a Christian. It is unclear whether Ibrahim's sentence of 100 lashes for adultery-- because of her marriage to her Christian husband-- also was reversed.  (See prior posting.) Ibrahim's lawyers will meet with U.S. Embassy officials today to discuss possible asylum for her in the United States. Her Christian husband is an American citizen.

3rd Circuit: No Statute of Limitations For Establishment Clause Challenge To Still-Existing Display

In Tearpock-Martini v. Borough of Shickshinny, (3d Cir., June 23, 2014), the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals held that Establishment Clause claims challenging still-existing religious displays are not subject to a statute of limitations defense. At issue was a directional sign on municipal property in a Pennsylvania town pointing the way to a local Baptist church. The sign included a depiction of a cross and a Bible. The court concluded that while the "continuing violation" doctrine does not apply to the display, nevertheless "strict application of the statutory limitations period both serves no salutary purpose and threatens to immunize indefinitely the presence of an allegedly unconstitutional display."

Inter-School Athletic Eligibility Rules Do Not Violate Free Exercise Rights of Home-School Family

In Chapman v. Pennsylvania Interscholastic Athletic Association, (MD PA, June 18, 2014), a Pennsylvania federal district court rejected a claim by the parent of a home-schooled student that rules on eligibility to participate in inter-school athletics violate her free exercise rights, as well as her equal protection rights and the right to direct the education of her son.  At issue is a rule that allows home-schooled students to participate only on teams of their local public school, and not on a parochial school team.  Plaintiff claimed that the rule prevented "the home-schooler who is committed to play in a God-centered environment" from doing so. The court found that the rule is neutral and generally applicable so that it need only satisfy the "rational basis" test, and that any burden on religious exercise is minimal.

Another Diocese's Charities Get Preliminary Injunction Against Contraceptive Mandate Compromise

In Brandt v. Burwell, (WD PA, June 20, 2014), a Pennsylvania federal district court granted a preliminary injunction against applying the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage accommodation to charitable and educational affiliates of the Greensburg, Pennsylvania diocese.  The court found that the accommodation imposes a substantial burden on free exercise in violation of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.  In doing so, the court relied on its earlier decisions on the same issue in Persico v. Sebelius (see prior posting) and Zubik v. Sebelius (see prior posting). The Legal Intelligencer reports on the decision.

SCOTUS Securities Law Decision Involves Charitable Fund That Supports Milwaukee Archdiocese

Today the U.S. Supreme Court decided Halliburton Co. v. Erica P. John Fund, Inc., (S. Ct., June 23, 2014) largely rejecting attempts by a corporate defendant to make securities fraud class actions by investors more difficult to pursue. The corporation was unsuccessful in urging the court to overturn the so-called "fraud on the market" theory that creates a rebuttable presumption that investors relied on public misstatements. The 6-3 decision did give a small concession to defendants, allowing them to present certain rebuttal evidence as the class certification stage. The victory for plaintiffs has implications for the Catholic Archdiocese of Milwaukee. Lead plaintiff in the case is a charitable fund that has been an important source of funds-- some $600,000 per year-- for the Archdiocese.  Prior to 2009, the Fund was known as the Archdiocese of Milwaukee Supporting Fund. (See prior posting.) The Milwaukee Archdiocese is in the midst of a bankruptcy reorganization. (See prior posting.)

Malaysia's Top Court Denies Leave To Appeal Ban On Catholic Paper's Use of "Allah"

AstroAwani , MSN News  and AlJazeera all report on today's decision by Malaysia's highest court to refuse leave to appeal in a widely followed religious freedom case.  By a vote of 4-3, Malaysia's Federal Court denied an application by the Catholic Church for leave to appeal a Court of Appeals decision that barred the Catholic newspaper, The Herald, from using the term "Allah" in its Malay language edition to refer to God. (See prior posting.)  "Allah" has been widely used by Christians in Sabah and Sarawak to refer to God. However the government argues that its use in non-Muslim literature may confuse Muslims and lead them to convert.

Recent Articles of Interest

From  SSRN:

• Howard Kislowicz, Faithful Translations? Cross-Cultural Communications in Canadian Religious Freedom Litigation, (Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 52(1), 2014 Forthcoming).
• Sylvie Langlaude, Parental Disputes, Religious Upbringing and Welfare in English Law and the ECHR., ((2014) 9(1) Religion and Human Rights: An International Journal 1-30).
• Aaron R. Petty, 'Faith, However Defined': Reassessing JFS and the Judicial Conception of 'Religion', (6 Elon Law Review 117 (2014)).
• Ilan Fuchs & Aviad Yehiel Hollander, National Movements and International Law: Rabbi Shlomo Goren's Understanding of International Law, (Journal of Law and Religion, Forthcoming).
• Faisal Kutty, Islamic Law and Adoptions, (Forthcoming in Robert L. Ballard et al., The Intercountry Adoption Debate: Dialogues Across Disciplines (Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2014)).

From SmartCILP and elsewhere:

• K. Benson, The Chaplaincy Exception In International Humanitarian Law: "American-Born Cleric" Anwar al-Awlaki and the Global War on Terror, 20 Buffalo Human Rights Law Review 1-36 (2013-2014).
• Charles J. Russo, Religious Freedom in the United States: "When You Come To a Fork In the Road, Take It", 38 University of Dayton Law Review 363-400 (2013).
• Jennifer B. Scheu, A First Amendment Objection To the Affordable Care Act's Individual Mandate, 79 Brooklyn Law Review 953-984 (2014).
• Mark Strasser, Conscience Clauses and the Placement of Children, 15 Journal of Law & Family Studies 1-18 (2013).
• Lisa A. Runquist & David T. Ball, Whither the Parsonage Allowance?  Will It Survive the Most Recent Attack?, Business Law Today (June 2014).

Australia's Top Court Invalidates Federal Spending For School Chaplaincy Programs

In Williams v. Commonwealth of Australia, (High Ct. of Australia, June 19, 2014), Australia's highest court held that Australia's Parliament exceeded the powers given to the national government when it provided funds for chaplaincy services in public schools run by the states. The suit was brought by an atheist parent who objected to his son learning gospel songs in school.  AP reports on the decision, suggesting that the chaplaincy program could be constitutionally funded by providing grants to the states for the program. It quotes Sydney University constitutional lawyer Anne Twomey:

They could have always done this stuff through the states under grants; they chose to do these things by direct methods and one of the reasons they did that in the past was to get directly the political kudos that come from it.... The chaplaincy program was all about getting direct political support from religious lobby groups....

A Court press release also summarizes the decision. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Mormon Church Sues Canadian Sect Leader Over Name Misappropriation

The Vancouver Sun and Reuters reported last week that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (the mainline Mormon Church) has filed suit against Winston Blackmore, leader of a polygamous Mormon sect headquartered in Bountiful, British Columbia for misappropriation of the trademarked name, identity and reputation of the mainline Church.  Blackmore, who headed the Canadian branch of the FLDS until he was excommunicated by leader Warren Jeffs, founded his own sect with followers comprised mostly of his extended family in British Columbia, Idaho, Utah and Arizona, and initially incorporated it as the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. However he changed it in 2010 to eliminate the word "Fundamentalist."  The mainline church discovered this in January when, after changing the form of its Canadian branch from an Alberta trust to a corporation, it tried to register its name in British Columbia and had its application rejected.  Its filings in the B.C. Supreme Court indicate that the confusion has led to diversion of contributions intended for the mainline Church.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Abdul-Aziz v. Ricci, (3d Cir, June 16, 2014), the 3rd Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a Muslim inmate's complaint that Muslim inmates were served vegetarian meals while donated meals with Halal meat were refused, and that he was not permitted to have prayer oil in his cell. Dismissal of his complaints of retaliation were also affirmed.

In Cotton v. Cate, (9th Cir., June 16, 2014), the 9th Circuit reversed the dismissal of a Shetaut Neter inmate's RLUIPA claim for a Kemetic diet, holding that the government had not adequately shown there was not a less restrictive alternative to denying plaintiff's food request.

In Ali v. Wingert, (10th Cir., June 19, 2014), the 10th Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a Muslim inmate's complaint that he had problems with his mail being processed when it contained only his religious name without also including his committed name.

In Stigler-El v. Stilwell, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79939 (SD IN, June 11, 2014), an Indiana federal district court dismissed an inmate's claim of discrimination against his Moorish precepts of Islamism, but with leave to show why judgment should not issue.

In Alexander v. Michigan, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79271 (WD MI, June 11, 2014), a Michigan federal district court, although dismissing a number of defendants on immunity grounds, permitted an inmate to proceed against the warden, the chaplain and the state on his complaint that authorities refused to recognize separately and accommodate the practices of the Ismaili branch of the Moorish Science Temple.

In Oram v. Linderman, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78836 (D AZ, June 9, 2014),an Arizona federal district court dismissed complaints of an inmate who is a gentile practitioner of Torah Observant Messianic Judaism that weekly religious services are limited to 60 minutes (instead of the 3 hours he requested) and that there are limits on the size of prayer shawls.

In West v. Grams, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 82030 (WD WI, June 16, 2014), a Wisconsin federal magistrate judge amended his former order that improperly dismissed a Muslim inmate's RLUIPA claim for injunctive relief on qualified immunity grounds, and instead dismissed it on mootness grounds because plaintiff has been transferred to a new prison. The underlying claim related to availability of religious services and alleged retaliation.

In Desmond v. Phelps, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81874 (D DE, June 16, 2014), a Delaware federal district court denied a motion for injunctive relief by inmates who claimed discrimination against Catholics in access to religious services, religious leaders and accommodation of various religious practices after certain Catholic volunteers were banned from the facility.

In Evans v. Godinez, 2014 IL App (4th) 130686-U (IL App., June 18, 2014), an Illinois state appellate court upheld a prison's refusal to provide study groups and prayer services for Nation of Islam inmates.

NYT Details Plight of Christian Convert In Afghanistan

The New York Times yesterday reported at length on the plight in Afghanistan of a Muslim convert to Christianity (identified only as "Josef") who is in hiding as his brother-in-law and uncles are seeking to find him and kill him for apostasy. More generally, according to the report:

In official eyes here, there are no Afghan Christians. The few Afghans who practice the faith do so in private for fear of persecution, attending one of a handful of underground churches that are believed to be operating in the country. Expatriates use chapels on embassy grounds, but those are effectively inaccessible to Afghans.

Only a few Afghan converts have surfaced in the past decade, and the government has typically dealt with them swiftly and silently: They are asked to recant, and if they refuse, they are expelled, usually to India, where an Afghan church flourishes in New Delhi....

That leaves Josef almost nowhere to turn for protection. The police would be no help. Converts report being beaten and sexually abused while in custody.

Split Developing In Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church

The New York Times posted an article yesterday titled Ukrainian Church Faces Obscure Pro-Russia Revolt in Its Own Ranks, detailing an "obscure pro-Moscow revolt" faced by the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church from some of its own clergy.  While the Ukrainian Orthodox Church has already split between its Kyvian and Moscow Patriarchates, now the previously unified Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church faces a possible split:

As with other fundamentalist groups that have split from long-established churches..., the breakaway Ukrainian outfit is obsessed with homosexuality and with preventing any tolerance of what it views as a grave sin. But theological issues, its critics say, mask a geopolitical agenda that puts it firmly on the side of Russia in opposition to Ukraine’s drawing closer to the Europe.

Christian College Wins Preliminary Injunction Against ACA Contraceptive Coverage Mandate

In Colorado Christian University v. Sebelius, (D CO, June 20, 2014), a Colorado federal district court granted a preliminary injunction preventing enforcement against a Christian liberal arts university of the Affordable Care Act contraception  coverage mandate compromise as it applies to coverage for drugs, devices, or procedures that may destroy a human embryo or fertilized egg.  The court concluded that completion of the exemption form that results in coverage directly by the health plan's third-party administrator imposes a substantial burden on the school's religious exercise.  The court said in part:

Any myopic focus on the brevity of the Exemption Form and its ease of completion misses the mark. It is the de facto forced facilitation of the objectionable coverage that is religiously repugnant. The resultant moral abhorrence is not effectively extenuated by a transfer of responsibility via the Exemption Form from CCU to the TPA or another entity. Such legal legerdemain does not expiate the morally unacceptable means or end. Such a compelled concession by an ostensibly innocuous legal prophylactic does not ameliorate the ignominy of the moral obliquity created by the participation in the process.

Further, it is of no moment that ultimately the decision by an employee to elect the objectionable coverage is optional. It is the offer that is morally offensive regardless of the extent of its acceptance.

Becket Fund issued a press release announcing the decision.

Republican Politicians Address Evangelical Christian Conference

Today was the final day of the 3-day Faith and Freedom Coalition 2014 Conference in Washington D.C.. According to Huffington Post, the conference was attended by over 1000 Christian evangelical leaders who were addressed by major Republican leaders.  Videos of the remarks of a number of the speakers are available: Luncheon Speakers (Senators Mike Lee (R-UT), Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Ted Cruz (R-TX)); Representative Kevin McCarthy (R-CA); Representative Tom Price (R-GA); Representative Louie Gohmert (R-TX); Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY);  Representative Steve King (R-IA); Senator Rand Paul (R-KY); Ralph Reed ; Rick Santorum; Michele Bachman (R-MN); Governor Chris Christie (R-NJ) ; Herman Cain.

Court In India Says State Government Must Enforce Ritual Decision of Temple Managing Committee

In Bhabani PR. Mishra v State, (Orissa High Ct., June 20, 2014), the High Court of the Indian state of Orissa held that the state government must abide by the decision of the Managing Committee of the Jagnnath Temple in maintaining law and order during Rath Yatra (Car Festival).  The Temple Managing Committee made a controversial decision that devotees are not permitted to climb on top of the chariots that carry the deities to the Shri Gundicha Temple. According to the Business Standard, the state government had found itself in the middle of a dispute between priests who wanted the tradition of devotees climbing on the chariots to continue, and the Managing Committee that wanted the tradition ended in conformity with the opinion of HH Shankaracharya, Puri.  The state government had appointed a high level committee to resolve the dispute, but now the state law minister says that the government will merely abide by the decision of the High Court.

UN Committee Concerned Over Child Trafficking For Religious Rituals In Britain

As reported by AFP, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child yesterday released its observations on the report of Great Britain relating to child trafficking. (Full text of UN document),   Among other things, the U.N. committee expressed particular concern about trafficking of children for use in religious rituals:

The Committee is strongly concerned that thousands of children continue to be trafficked every year in the State party, particularly for sexual exploitation and labour, and it expresses its deepest concern about reports that hundreds of children have been abducted from their families in Africa and trafficked to the State party for brutal religious rituals, such as the so-called voodoo and juju rituals. 

Break-Away Presbyterian Congregation Sues To Retain Property Ownership

The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reported yesterday that the Sheboygan County, Wisconsin First Church of Oostburg has filed a state court lawsuit against the Presbyterian Church USA in a bid to retain ownership of congregational property in the wake of its vote last week to disaffiliate from the Presbyterian Church USA and join the more conservative Covenant Order of Evangelical Presbyterians. The Church of Oostburg's vote to disaffiliate came just days ahead of the decision at the Presbyterian General Assembly to allow clergy to officiate at same-sex marriage ceremonies and to redefine marriage as a covenant between "two people".  The Presbyterian Church wants the Oostburg congregation to pay $500,000 in order to keep the property.

Pennsylvania Federal Court Denies Intervention To Appeal Same-Sex Marriage Case

As previously reported, in May a Pennsylvania federal district court held Pennsylvania's laws banning same-sex marriage to be unconstitutional, and Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett announced that the state will not appeal the decision.  Some two weeks later, Theresa Santai-Gaffney, clerk of courts in Schuylkill County moved to intervene in order to appeal the court's decision to the 3rd Circuit.  In Whitewood v. Wolf, (MD PA, June 18, 2014), the federal district court rejected the motion to intervene.  The court held that Santai-Gafney has not met the criteria for either intervention as of right or permissive intervention.  The court said:

At bottom, we have before us a contrived legal argument by a private citizen who seeks to accomplish what the chief executive of the Commonwealth, in his wisdom, has declined to do.

AP reports on the decision.

Convictions of Anti-Gay Pride Protesters Reversed

In Faust v. State of Texas, (TX Ct. App., June 12, 2014), a Texas state appeals court reversed the convictions of two members of the Kingdom Baptist Church who were charged with interference with public duties.  The convictions grew out of the church members' attempt at a gay pride parade to cross a police line formed to keep a distance between KBC protesters and the parade. The court said in part:

The skirmish line at issue here was not narrowly tailored to serve the government’s interest in public safety. All members of the church were barred from proceeding down the street regardless of whether they had previously assaulted parade-goers or not, whether they were yelling profanity or threatening words or not, or whether they were even protesting at all. Although there was evidence that the police department had received complaints about the church’s “street preaching” many times in the past, the only evidence the church had ever reached beyond the boundaries of protected speech was that one of their members, Chad Sutherland, had assaulted a parade participant at the 2011 parade. There was no evidence that Sutherland was with the church members at the 2012 parade, that any of the members present at the 2012 parade were involved with the 2011 assault, or that any of the members present were threatening any parade-goers with imminent physical injury. ....

The skirmish line prohibited all members of the church from exercising their right of free speech merely because of their association with the church. This is far too broad a limitation.... Although we do not believe that the police were required to wait until violence erupted before they stepped in, we do believe there must have been some indication that the public’s safety was at risk beyond the history of one assault by a member of the organization who may not even have been present at the time the skirmish line was in place..... Because the skirmish line was not narrowly tailored, it was an unconstitutional infringement upon Appellants’ right of free speech.

Christian News reports on the decision.

Student Religious Liberty Bills Await Governors' Signatures In Missouri, North Carolina

This week the North Carolina General Assembly gave its final approval, and sent to the governor for his signature, Senate Bill 370, protecting students' rights to engage in prayer and religious expression in public schools. It allows students to express religious viewpoints to other students to the same extent that students can express non-religious viewpoints, and to express religious viewpoints in classwork and homework without discrimination. It also requires student religious groups to be treated the same as non-religious groups. However students may not harass or coerce other students. The bill also sets out grievance procedures for students or parents who believe a student's religious expression rights have been infringed.

Similarly, the Missouri General Assembly passed and on May 30 sent to the governor for his signature H.B. 1303 protecting student religious liberty. It requires public schools to treat student expression of religious viewpoints in the same manner that they treat expressions of other viewpoints, and protects expressions of religious viewpoints in school work and on clothing worn to school. It gives student religious groups the same rights as non-religious groups. [Thanks to Blog From the Capital for the leads.]

Court Allows Eruv In Long Island Town

In Verizon New York, Inc. v. Village of Westhampton Beach, (ED NY, June 16, 2014), a New York federal magistrate judge gave at least a partial victory to the East End Eruv Association, a Jewish organization that is attempting to place an eruv in Suffolk County, New York. An eruv is a symbolic boundary, marked off with plastic strips (lechis) on telephone poles. Observant Jews may carry items within the eruv on the Sabbath without violating Jewish religious law.  In this case, Verizon and Long Island Lighting Co. granted the Association the right to use their poles for an eruv, but three municipalities objected.  The utilities sued for a declaration that they had the right to allow use of their poles for this purpose.  This opinion ultimately dealt with only one of the municipalities-- Westhampton Beach.  The court concluded that the utilities' franchise agreements do not limit their authority permit the eruv; the Transportation Corporations Law and the LIPA Act provide authority for the utilities to enter contracts for use of their poles; while Westhampton has authority to regulate utility poles owned by the utilities, it has not passed any regulations that prohibit attaching lechis to the poles.  27East and Jewish Week report  on the decision.

Court Upholds Pennsylvania's Sunday Hunting Ban

In Hunters United For Sunday Hunting v. Pennsylvania Game Commission, (MD PA, June 18, 2014), a Pennsylvania federal district court rejected constitutional challenges by a hunters' group to Pennsylvania's ban on Sunday hunting for fur bearing animals or game.  Plaintiffs had asserted that the ban violates the 2nd Amendment, the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause, and the First Amendment's religion clauses. Rejecting plaintiff's establishment clause claim, the court said in part:

The Court cannot divine Plaintiffs’ injury-in-fact from their allegation that “Defendants [sic] enforcement and prohibition on Sunday hunting no longer has a secular basis but instead a religious basis.”

The court also pointed to Supreme Court precedent upholding Sunday closing laws.  AP reports on the decision. (See prior related posting.)

$108M Damages In Faith-Healing Death Upheld

In Mansfield v. Horner, (MO App., June 17, 2014), a Missouri state appellate court upheld a wrongful death judgment of over $108 million in the faith-healing death of Misty Mansfield growing out of complications after the stillbirth of her child.  The suit was brought by Misty's parents against her husband Caleb Horner and Caleb's brother, John, who was the leader of the faith-healing sect to which Caleb and Misty belonged.  The sect, which Misty joined only when she married Caleb, also required a wife to be submissive to their husband's decisions.  Caleb convinced Misty not to go to the hospital when complications arose during her labor at home, and the breech delivery was botched by Caleb and his religious-based birth team.  Caleb's brother John arrived after the stillbirth and prayed for hours attempting to raise the child from the dead, while Misty was not treated for her vaginal cuts and an emergency team that arrived 9 hours later was denied access to Misty by Caleb. A month after the delivery, Misty died from an ongoing infection.

The appeals court rejected nine objections to the trial court's refusal to override the jury's verdict, including an objection that the suit violates the First Amendment's free exercise clause.  Rejecting that argument, the court said in part:

None of [the jury] instructions required the jury to determine the validity of the Horners' belief in faith healing. The jury never had to determine "the truth or falsity" of faith healing. Instead, the instructions required the jury to determine whether or not the Horners' actions -- particularly with respect to Caleb's actions during the home birth and John and Caleb's actions preventing Misty from seeking medical treatment following the home birth -- constituted negligence. Thus, we do not conclude that the trial court committed plain error in overruling the Horners' motion for JNOV with respect to their claim of a First Amendment violation.

District Court Upholds ACA Non-Profit Contraceptive Mandate Rules

In Eternal Word Television Network v. Burwell, (SD AL, June 17, 2014), an Alabama federal district court granted summary judgment to Department of Health and Human Services, rejecting a Catholic media network's challenges to the rules accommodating religious non-profits' objections to the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage mandate.  Rejecting EWTN's "substantial burden" argument under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the court said in part:

Legally (if not morally) speaking, there is a world of difference between a law that compels EWTN to provide contraceptive coverage directly and one in which the government places that burden on someone else after EWTN opts out. Because EWTN’s only religious objection to the mandate hinges upon the effect it will have on other parties after EWTN signs Form 700 rather than anything inherent to the act of signing and delivering Form 700 itself, the court finds that the mandate does not impose a substantial burden on EWTN’s religious practice within the meaning of RFRA. As a result, EWTN’s RFRA claim fails as a matter of law.

The court also rejected EWTN's free exercise, establishment clause and compelled speech claims.  It concluded that the mandate is a neutral law of general applicability, and that "the accommodation’s certification requirement does not compel EWTN to express any opinions or beliefs that it does not hold."

In a press release reacting to the decision, EWTN said it would file an immediate appeal to the 11th Circuit.

Utah Supreme Court Refuses To Set Aside Default Judgment In FLDS Land Case

In Wisan v. City of Hildale, (UT Sup. Ct., June 17, 2014), the Utah Supreme Court, in the latest decision in the long running litigation over the Fundamentalist Church of Latter Day Saints United Effort Plan Trust, refused on procedural grounds to set aside a default judgment that had been entered against Hildale, Utah and the Twin City Water Authority.  The default judgment came in an attempt by the court-appointed trustee to subdivide the trust land in order to facilitate distribution of separate parcels that did not carry liability for neighbors' tax delinquencies.  The court held that the grounds asserted by defendants are not ones that can be raised in a direct appeal of a trial court's refusal to set aside a default judgment.

Egyptian Appeals Court Imposes Jail Sentence On Teacher For Allegedly Insulting Islam

In Egypt on Sunday, a appellate court sentenced a 23-year old Coptic Christian elementary school teacher to 6 months in jail for insulting Islam.  According to Arutz Sheva, the head of the parents' association at a Luxor school filed a complaint last May against teacher Demiana Emad claiming that she told her students that the late Coptic pope Shenuda III was better than the Prophet Mohammed. However an Egyptian civil rights group says she only presented a lesson in comparative religion. A trial court had imposed a fine equivalent to approximately $14,000 (US) on the teacher.  Both she and the state appealed, and the appellate court imposed the heavier sentence. Apparently an additional appeal can still be filed.

Obama Moves Toward Executive Order To End LGBT Discrimination By Federal Contractors

According to The Hill, a White House official announced yesterday that "the President has directed his staff to prepare for his signature an Executive Order that prohibits federal contractors from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity."  No specific date for signing the executive order was announced, apparently in the hope that the House of Representatives will take up the Senate-passed Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) which would extended LGBT non-discrimination protection to all workers. However this seems unlikely in the face of opposition by House Speaker John Boehner who says that ENDA would cost jobs by creating frivolous law suits.

Man Charged After He Destroys Statue of Jesus For Religious Reasons

Yesterday's Charleston Post and Courier reports on the arrest last Sunday of 38-year old Charles Jeffrey Short for malicious injury to real property after he hammered off the head of a statue of Jesus that stands near a Charleston, South Carolina Catholic church. Short says he was making a religious statement. He told police he battered the statue with a sledge hammer "because the second or first commandment states to not make an image of a male or female to be on display to the public." Police are investigating whether Short was also involved in a similar incident last Friday in which a head and two hands were broken off another statue depicting Jesus and a child that stands at the same church.

SCOTUS Review Denied Over Interesting Dissent In Challenge To School Graduations In Churches

The U.S. Supreme Court today denied certiorari in Elmbrook School District v. John Doe 3, (Docket No. 12-755, cert. denied 6/16/2014), but with an unusual opinion dissenting to the denial of review, written by Justice Scalia and joined by Justice Thomas. (Order List, [scroll to end for opinion]). In the case, the 7th Circuit, in a 7-3 en banc decision, held that two Wisconsin high schools violated the Establishment Clause when they regularly held their graduation ceremonies in the sanctuary of a non-denominational evangelical Christian church. (See prior posting.)

Justice Scalia's dissent focuses largely on the Supreme Court's decision earlier this term in Town of Greece, reading that opinion more broadly than many commentators have so far done. Justice Scalia implicitly sees Town of Greece as impacting more than just invocations before legislative bodies, and says almost nothing about the special concern that the Court has shown historically for religious activities in public schools.  He begins his dissent with this summary:

Some there are-- many perhaps-- who are offended by public displays of religion.... I can understand that attitude: It parallels mine toward the playing in public of rock music or Stravinsky. And I too am especially annoyed when the intrusion upon my inner peace occurs while I am part of a captive audience, as on a municipal bus or in the waiting room of a public agency.

My own aversion cannot be imposed by law because of the First Amendment.

Justice Scalia then goes on to argue first that Town of Greece abandons the "endorsement test" under the Establishment Clause, and that, second, it requires coercion amounting to more than mere offense to show an Establishment Clause violation. Lastly he emphasizes that the Establishment Clause should be interpreted according to historical practices and understandings, a consideration absent from the 7th Circuit's majority opinion. [Thanks to Marty Lederman via Rellgionlaw for the lead.]

North Carolina County Seeks Lifting of Injunction After Town of Greece Decision

The Winston-Salem Journal reported last week that Forsyth County, North Carolina is asking a federal district court to lift a 2010 injunction that barred it from continuing a policy of opening County Board of Commissioners meetings with prayers that are repeatedly Christian. The 4th Circuit had affirmed the issuance of the injunction. (See prior posting.) Last week's motion comes in light of the Supreme Court's recent decision in Town of Greece permitting a neutral policy that nevertheless results in primarily Christian invocations opening legislative bodies. Here is Forsyth County's brief in support of its motion to lift the injunction.  ADF issued a press release announcing the filing of the motion.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Valerie J. Munson, Fraud on the Faithful? The Charitable Intentions of Members of Religious Congregations and the Peculiar Body of Law Governing Religious Property in the United States, (Rutgers Law Journal Vol. 44, No. 3, 2014).
• Bruce Ledewitz, Experimenting with Religious Liberty: The Quasi-Constitutional Status of Religious Exemptions, 6 Elon Law Review (2014).
• Kevin P. Lee, Emanuel Levinas on Hegel's Antigone: Levinas and the Problem of Modernity, (May 30, 2014). 
• Sara L. Ainsworth, Amicus Curiae Brief: Stormans, Inc. v. Selecky, (Hastings Women's Law Journal, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 303-37, Summer 2013).
• Tabatha Abu El-Haj, All Assemble: Order and Disorder in Law, Politics, and Culture, (University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law, Vol. 16, No. 4, 2014 Forthcoming).
• Seema Mohapatra, Time to Lift the Veil of Inequality in Health Care Coverage: Using Corporate Law to Defend the Affordable Care Act, (May 23, 2014).
• Alice E. Marwick & Ross W. Miller, Online Harassment, Defamation, and Hateful Speech: A Primer of the Legal Landscape, (Fordham Center on Law and Information Policy Report No. 2, June 10, 2014).
• Nancy J. Knauer, Navigating a Post-Windsor World: The Promise and Limits of Marriage Equality, (Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law, Vol. 16, 2014, Forthcoming).

From SSRN (Islamic law):

• Hussein Elasrag, Corporate Governance in Islamic Financial Institutions, (May 26, 2014).
• Muhammad Munir, Rights of Children in Islamic Law: A Review of Selected Literature, (May 29, 2014).
• Timur Kuran, Institutional Roots of Authoritarian Rule in the Middle East: Civic Legacies of the Islamic Waqf, (Economic Research Initiatives at Duke (ERID) Working Paper No. 171, June 12, 2014).

From SmartCILP:

• Julie Maher, Eweida and Others: A New Era for Article 9?, 63 International & Comparative Law Quarterly 213-233 (2014).

Hearing Discloses Developments In Reformation of FLDS Land Trust

On Friday, a Utah state trial court held a one-and-a-half hour hearing in the state's 9-year long effort to reform the United Effort Plan Trust.  The Trust holds property of the polygamous FLDS Church in the sect's twin towns of Hilldale, Utah and Colorado City, Ariz.  AP and Fox13 report that a number of developments were revealed at the hearing. Judge Denise Lindberg urged the court-appointed trustee to begin evicting residents who have been ignoring the $100-per month housing fee for as long as 7 years. Collectively over $4.18 million in back fees is owed. During the hearing, Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes urged the court to appoint a board to take over redistribution of the 750 homes owned by the Trust.  Judge Lindberg said that she has chosen seven people for the board, but will not set it up until fees are being paid so the trust will have a stable source of revenue, and until liability insurance can be obtained for board members. It was also announced that former-FLDS member Willie Jessop has agreed with the court-appointed trustee to cooperate with investigations and litigation in exchange for receiving land.  In yet another development, the Arizona Attorney General's office told the court that it plans to file papers today to dismantle the Hildale/ Colorado City Town Marshal’s Office.

Court Rejects Claims Against Diocese By Victim of Clergy Sexual Abuse

In John Doe v. Corporation of the Catholic Bishop of Yakima, (ED WA, June 12, 2014), a Washington federal district court  dismissed negligent supervision and negligent infliction of emotional distress claims against the Diocese of Yakima brought by the victim of an incident of sexual abuse perpetrated by a deacon that occurred when the victim was 17 years old. While finding that the suit was not barred by the statute of limitations, the court held that no special relationship existed between the diocese and plaintiff, and the diocese had no reason to believe that the deacon posed a risk of inappropriate sexual conduct. National Catholic Reporter reports on the decision.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Jones v. Conrad, (8th Cir., June 2, 2014), the 8th Circuit upheld the dismissal of an inmate's complaint that he was denied permission to receive two religious publications sent to him through the mail. He failed to show that the denial substantially burdened his ability to practice his religion.

In Davis v. Abercrombie, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74934 (D HI, June 2, 2014), a Hawaii federal district court refused to reconsider its prior denial of summary judgment to defendants on Native Hawaiian inmates' complaints that they were denied daily outdoor group worship; and were denied daily access to amulets and bamboo nose flutes. However reconsideration was granted as to inmates' lack of access to certain other sacred items. The court also dismissed certain claims for prospective equitable relief as moot.

In Porter v. Biter, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77476 (ED CA, June 4, 2014), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed, with leave to amend, a Muslim inmate's attempt to obtain an order allowing him to change his legal name to a religious name and to use the religious name during normal prison activities such as sending and receiving mail.

In Cole v. Danberg, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77773 (D DE, June 6, 2014), a Delaware federal district court permitted a Muslim inmate to proceed with many of his claims for injunctive relief growing out of alleged religious discrimination, denial of right to observe Islamic holidays and have congregational prayer, and refusal to allow the Islamic community to raise funds.

In Schlemm v. Frank, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78601 (WD WI, June 10, 2014), a Wisconsin federal district court dismissed, partly on exhaustion and partly on substantive grounds, a complaint by a Native American inmate seeking sweat lodge ceremonies on a weekly basis, a Ghost Feast meal that includes wild game, and the right to wear multicolor headbands. a ribbon shirt, bear-claw jewelry and a personal pipe.

In Lindsey v. Bradley, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78856 (SD IL, June 9, 2014), an Illinois federal district court permitted a Rastafarian inmate to proceed with his complaint that his dreadlocks were forcibly cut.

In Davis v. Hubler, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 78835 (ED NC, June 10, 2014), a North Carolina federal district court dismissed a complaint by a Nation of Islam inmate that he was not permitted to receive the weekly publication Final Call.

In Glenn v. Wilson, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79303 (ND IN, June 10, 2014), an Indiana federal district court dismissed a complaint by an Eastern Orthodox inmate that he was unable to attend Eastern Orthodox religious services first when he was placed in administrative segregation and then when he was transferred to a prison without Orthodox services.

Sudan Apostasy Case Draws U.S. Attention As Appeal Begins

Zegabi reports that in Khartoum, Sudan last week an Appeals Court hearing began in the case of 27-year old Meriam Yehya Ibrahim Ishag who was sentenced to death last month for maintaining her Christian faith, as well as to 100 lashes for adultery. Ishag's's father was a Muslim; so she is considered Muslim under Sudan's personal status law and her marriage to her Christian husband is considered void. (See prior posting.)  Meanwhile the case is garnering extensive attention in the United States.  On June 12, a group of demonstrators representing 46 organizations held a protest outside the White House.  Among the protesters were Sen. Ted Cruz who later told Christian Post:

We need far more leadership speaking out for religious liberty of everyone. And especially for Christians who are being targeted.... The reason this rally and protest is outside the White House is President Obama has to date failed to provide leadership on Meriam Ibrahim.

On the same day, Secretary of State John Kerry issued a statement (full text) calling on Sudan to release Ms. Ishag and to repeal its laws that are inconsistent with its 2005 Interim Constitution, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Suit Claims Church's Publicity On Muslim's Conversion Led To His Torture and Near Death In Syria

In Tulsa, Oklahoma, a John Doe plaintiff has filed a state court lawsuit seeking $75,000 in punitive damages against the First Presbyterian Church of Tulsa for publishing an online announcement of his December 2012 conversion from Islam to Christianity.  The complaint (full text) in Doe v. First Presbyterian Church U.S.A. of Tulsa, Oklahoma, (OK Dist. Ct., filed 6/9/2014), alleges that plaintiff travels periodically to Syria, and the church knew that any publicity about his baptism would pose a danger to his life. He says that when he was in Syria in January 2013, he was kidnapped, tortured and nearly beheaded before he escaped by forcibly taking a firearm from his captors and killing one of them who was his paternal uncle. He alleges he has received numerous death threats since returning to the United States.

Oklahoma's NewsOn6 and Tulsa Channel 8 report on the lawsuit and quote a statement in response released by the church which says in part: "The lawsuit is brought by a person who received the Sacrament of Baptism before the Congregation during a regular Sunday service at First Church." This appears to contradict the allegation in plaintiff's complaint that he received a "private baptism" at the church.

Facebook Not Liable For Delay In Removing Page Containing Anti-Jewish Threats

In Klayman v. Zuckerberg, (DC Cir., June 13, 2014), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit dismissed a suit against Facebook and its founder Mark Zuckerberg alleging assault and breach of duty of care growing out of Facebook's delay in removing a page titled "Third Palestinian Intifada."  The page proclaimed: "Judgment Day will be brought upon us only once Muslims have killed all the Jews." The suit alleged that it took Facebook "many days" after receiving complaints to remove the offending page.  Plaintiff sought an injunction and damages exceeding $1 billion.  The court held that Sec. 230(c) of the Communications Act (47 USC Sec. 230) shields Facebook from liability. That section provides:

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

Order Stayed By Court After Enjoining Wisconsin's Same-Sex Marriage Ban

As previously reported, on June 6 a Wisconsin federal district court declared Wisconsin's constitutional and statutory provisions barring same-sex marriage unconstitutional and instructed the parties to submit proposed language for an injunction. Now in Wolf v. Walker, (WD WI, June 13, 2014), the court issued a carefully worded injunction against the governor, state registrar and three county clerks. However the court also stayed the injunction, as well as its earlier declaratory judgment, until the conclusion of any appeals or after the expiration of the deadline for filing appeals.  Judge Crabb wrote in part:

If I were considering these factors as a matter of a first impression, I would be inclined to agree with plaintiffs that defendants have not shown that they are entitled to a stay. However, I cannot ignore the Supreme Court’s order in Herbert v. Kitchen, 134 S. Ct. 893 (2014), in which the Court stayed a district court’s order enjoining state officials in Utah from enforcing its ban on same-sex marriage.....  [S]ince Herbert, every statewide order enjoining the enforcement of a ban on same-sex marriage has been stayed, either by the district court or the court of appeals, at least when the state requested a stay.....

It is true that the Supreme Court declined to issue a stay in a more recent case in which a district court in Oregon enjoined enforcement of that state’s ban on same-sex marriage. National Organization for Marriage v. Geiger .... (June 4, 2014). However, that order is not instructive because the district court’s injunction was not opposed by the state; rather, a nonparty had requested the stay. Thus, I do not interpret Geiger as undermining the Court’s order in Herbert.

Yesterday's Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reports on the decision.

De Blasio's Universal Kindergarten Church-State Rules Unsatisfactory To Both Sides

In New York City, Mayor Bill de Blasio has created a free, full-day pre-kindergarten program, offered in part through community-based organizations, as a major initiative. (Implementation Plan.) Hamodia reported last month that the mayor has made a number of concessions in order to attract Orthodox Jewish schools to participate in the program. The New York Daily News reported yesterday that the New York Civil Liberties Union is concerned that some of these cross the church-state separation line:

Guidance provided to religious schools by city officials in May allows them to screen potential teachers based on their religion “to the extent permitted by law,” use religious texts “when presented objectively” and give lessons in other languages such as Yiddish and Hebrew.

Nevertheless, according to The Forward yesterday a number of ultra-Orthodox schools may opt not to participate in the program.  They are particularly concerned about the ban on staff leading blessings after meals, and about the length of the required school day which will make it difficult to add hours for religious instruction at the beginning or end of the school day. Regulations for a similar program offered by New York state outside of New York City are more flexible, and some New York City Jewish schools are looking at whether they can apply to this program instead.

European Court Faults Russia For Dissolving Pentecostal Church

In Biblical Centre of the Chuvash Republic v. Russia, (ECHR 1st Section, June 12, 2014), the European Court of Human Rights in a Chamber Judgment held that Russia violated Art. 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights (freedom of thought, conscience and religion) interpreted in light of Art. 11 (freedom of assembly and association) when it ordered dissolution of a Pentecostal religious organization.  In a press release, the Court summarized the facts:

The applicant is a Russian religious organisation, the Biblical Centre of the Evangelical (Pentecostal) Christians of the Chuvash Republic. Belonging to the Pentecostal movement of the Christian faith, it was registered as a religious organisation in November 1991, founding a Biblical college and Sunday school in 1996. However, following inspections of the Biblical Centre in April and May 2007, the domestic courts ruled against the applicant organisation in two sets of administrative proceedings for allowing the Centre to conduct educational activities without authorisation and for violating sanitary rules and hygienic requirements. On that basis, the Supreme Court upheld the prosecuting authorities’ claim to dissolve the applicant organisation in August 2007 and, following the dismissal of the organisation’s appeal in October 2007, it was dissolved with immediate effect.

In its decision, the Court held:

the domestic authorities have not shown that the dissolution, which undermined the very substance of the applicant organisation’s rights to freedom of religion and association, was the only option for the fulfilment of the aims they pursued.

An ACLJ press release reports on the decision.

Christian-Themed Park Turns Down State Economic Grant After Church-State Complaints

In Sioux City, Iowa, developers of a Christian-themed park have decided to turn down a $140,000 state economic development grant after objections were raised by the Freedom From Religion Foundation.  AP reported this week that developers of Shepherd's Garden do not want to be in the middle of lawsuits over the park. While the park is to include a stone path with Bible verses, and prayer spaces, the funding from the state organization, Vision Iowa, was not to go to religious elements of the park.  A member of the park's board said that FFRF's objections stimulated enough private donors to pay for the project.

Consent Decree Entered In Suit Over Devotional Exercises In School

The American Humanist Association yesterday announced the entry of a consent decree which settles its lawsuit against a Missouri school district.  AHA sued the district over devotional exercises held before the beginning of school in the classroom of a teacher who is adviser to the Christian student group. (See prior posting.) The consent decree (full text) in American Humanist Association v. Fayette R-III School District, (WD MO, May 19, 2014) requires the school district to amend its Student-Teacher Handbook in various ways and provides other relief.  As summarized in AHA's press release:

In the consent decree agreed upon by the parties, the school is permanently enjoined from promoting prayer and religious activity, and religious clubs will be given no special privileges that other clubs do not enjoy. The school district also agreed to amend its announcement policies so that they will not identify any religious activities taking place at student group meetings. Also, faculty sponsors of student groups will not be permitted to participate in religious activities of the groups. School employees will also no longer be allowed to keep religious materials in places in open view.

European Court Upholds Spain's Dismissal of Priest As Public School Teacher

In Martinez v. Spain, (ECHR, June 12, 2014), the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights, in a 9-8 decision, held that there had not been a violation of a Catholic priest's rights under Art. 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights when he was not renewed as teacher of Catholic religion and ethics in a State secondary school in Spain.  Art. 8 deals with respect for private and family life.

The priest, Fr. Jose Martinez, was ordained in 1961.  He applied for a dispensation from celibacy in 1984, but when he did not receive a response by the following year he married in a civil ceremony. He and his wife had 5 children.  Martinez taught in a state high school from 1991 until 1997 when the Vatican granted his dispensation from celibacy, but at the same time ruled that he could no longer teach religion in a state school unless the local bishop decided otherwise. The Vatican's ruling obligated his removal from his position in the state school pursuant to an agreement between Spain and the Holy See. This ruling followed publication of an article in a Spanish newspaper about the "Movement for Optional Celibacy of Priests" in which Martinez was an active member. The article, illustrated with a picture of Martinez and his family, quoted members' views on abortion, divorce, sexuality and contraception which were contrary to those of the Church.

The court said in part:

the applicant ... must have been aware, in accepting the task of teaching Catholic religion, of the potential consequences of the heightened duty of loyalty vis-à-vis the Catholic Church by which he thus became bound, for the purpose, in particular, of preserving the credibility of his teaching....

Focusing on the Church's rights of autonomy, the court said:

the right of believers to freedom of religion encompasses the expectation that they will be allowed to associate freely, without arbitrary State intervention. The autonomous existence of religious communities is indispensable for pluralism in a democratic society and is thus an issue at the very heart of the protection which Article 9 of the Convention affords.

Four separate dissenting opinions were also filed. The Court also issued a press release summarizing the 65 pages of decisions. The Becket Fund issued a press release on the decision applauding the vindication of church autonomy and criticizing the dissent by Judge Dedov that strongly takes issue with the Catholic Church's rules on celibacy for priests.

Groups Ask Holder To Withdraw Memo Allowing Religious Hiring Preferences In Federal Grant Programs

This week, 90 religious, educational, civil rights, labor, LGBT, women’s, and health groups signed a joint letter (full text) to Attorney General Eric Holder asking that the Office of Legal Counsel withdraw the Bush Administration's June 29,  2007 memo allowing faith-based organization that receive federal grant funds to give a preference to co-religionists in hiring. That memo concluded that RFRA overrides the religious anti-discrimination provisions of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (see prior posting). However, according this week's joint letter, the OLC memo has been applied to other grant programs as well, including most recently to grants under the Violence Against Women Act.  A Department of Justice  Frequently Asked Questions memo dated April 9, 2014 says that the non-discrimination grant provision in the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 does not apply to hiring of co-religionists by faith-based organizations where the funded program is an exercise of religion, foregoing a religious preference in hiring would be a substantial burden, and the funding agency cannot show a compelling interest furthered by the least restrictive means.  This week's letter argues:

RFRA should not be interpreted or employed as a tool for broadly overriding statutory protections against religious discrimination or to create a broad free exercise right to receive government grants without complying with applicable regulations that protect taxpayers.

[Thanks to Michael Lieberman for the lead.]

British Supreme Court: Civil Courts May Decide Religious Doctrine To Settle Legal Disputes

In Shergill & Ors v Khaira & Ors, (UK Sup. Ct., June 11, 2014) the United Kingdom Supreme Court held that British courts should not treat religious disputes as non-justiciable "where the determination of the dispute is necessary in order to decide a matter of disputed legal right...."  The case involves a dispute over who are the proper trustees in three Sikh temples and the powers which trustees may exercise.  The Supreme Court held in part:

... courts do not adjudicate on the truth of religious beliefs or on the validity of particular rites. But where a claimant asks the court to enforce private rights and obligations which depend on religious issues, the judge may have to determine such religious issues as are capable of objective ascertainment. The court addresses questions of religious belief and practice where its jurisdiction is invoked either to enforce the contractual rights of members of a community against other members or its governing body or to ensure that property held on trust is used for the purposes of the trust....

... the court may have to adjudicate upon matters of religious doctrine and practice in order to determine who are the trustees entitled to administer the trusts. Subject to further amendment of the parties’ cases, the question whether Sant Jeet Singh has power to appoint and dismiss trustees may depend on issues such as (i) what are the fundamental tenets of the First Holy Saint and the Nirmal sect, (ii) what is the nature of the institution at Nirmal Kutia in India, (iii) what steps or formalities were needed for a person to become the successor of the First Holy Saint, and (iv) in relation to the fourth issue whether the teachings and personal qualities of Sant Jeet Singh comply with the fundamental religious aims and purposes of the trust....

[Thanks to Law & Religion UK for the lead.]

USCIRF Criticizes Burma's Proposed Religious Conversion Law

The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom issued a press release yesterday strongly criticizing the draft of the Religious Conversion Law that Burma's Parlisment has recently released for comment. USCIRF said in part:

“The draft conversion law is irreparably flawed and would contravene Burma’s international commitments to protect freedom of religion or belief.  Such a law has no place in the 21st century, and we urge that it be withdrawn,” said USCIRF Chairman Robert George.  “This draft law, and the three others that may follow, risk stoking continuing violence and discrimination against Muslims and other religious minorities, including Christians.”

The draft conversion law would create a governmental Registration Board to approve all religious conversions.  While stating that “everyone has the freedom to convert from one religion to another,” the draft law would create a system clearly geared to discourage conversion.  

6th Circuit Upholds ACA Contraceptive Mandate Accommodation For Religious Non-Profits

In Michigan Catholic Conference v. Burwell, (6th Cir., June 11, 2014), the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals denied preliminary injunctions to several Catholic non-profit entities that object to the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage accommodation.  The accommodation allows charitable and educational non-profits to opt out of furnishing contraceptive coverage to their employees by completing a form and sending it to their insurer or third party administrator which will then furnishes contraceptive coverage directly. The court rejected arguments by the non-profits that the accommodation rules substantially burden their religious exercise under RFRA.  The court said in part:

appellants appear to ask the court to defer not only to their belief that requesting the exemption or the accommodation makes them complicit in sin, but also to defer to their understanding of how the regulatory measure actually works....  [W]e will independently determine what the regulatory provisions require and whether they impose a substantial burden on appellants’ exercise of religion....

Submitting the self-certification form to the insurance issuer or third-party administrator does not “trigger” contraceptive coverage; it is federal law that requires the insurance issuer or the third-party administrator to provide this coverage.... The government’s imposition of an independent obligation on a third party does not impose a substantial burden on the appellants’ exercise of religion.

The court also rejected plaintiffs' free speech, free exercise and Establishment Clause challenges. Finally the Court rejected plaintiffs' claim that the contraceptive coverage mandate violates the Weldon Amendment designed to allow health care entities to refuse to perform or cover abortions. Plaintiffs contend that certain of the contraceptive methods covered are abortifacients.  The Court refused to defer the plan provider's definition of abortion, saying:

the federal courts will utilize traditional methods of statutory interpretation to determine whether “abortion” in the Weldon Amendment includes FDA-approved emergency contraceptives.

The 6th Circuit also lifted its previously issued stays pending appeal of the lower courts' decisions in the case.  MLive reports on the decision.

Lawyers In British Columbia Want Trinity Western Law School Rejected

In Canada, British Columbia-based Trinity Western, a Christian liberal arts university, has suffered a setback in its efforts to open a law school in 2016. The school is controversial because of the university's "community covenant" which requires staff, faculty and students to refrain, among other things, from sex outside of heterosexual marriage.  As previously reported, earlier this year the benchers of the Law Society of British Columbia voted to approve the proposed law school, making its graduates eligible to enter the Law Society's bar admissions program. Subsequently, however, over 1,000 British Columbia lawyers petitioned the Law Society to allow a vote of the entire membership on the issue.  Canadian Press reports that an advisory vote of the general membership was held on Tuesday and lawyers voted 3,210 to 968 for a resolution calling for the benchers to reject the school. Trinity Western is already in the process of suing law societies in Ontario and Nova Scotia which have refused to approve the school's graduates for bar admission. (See prior posting.)

EEOC Sues Claiming Company Required Employees To Engage In Religious Activities

The EEOC announced yesterday that it has filed suit yesterday in a New York federal district court against Syosset, N.Y.-based United Health Programs of America and its parent corporation for forcing employees to take part in religious activities in the workplace.  According to the EEOC, since 2007 employees have been required to participate in:

group prayers, candle burning, and discussions of spiritual texts. The religious practices are part of a belief system that the defendants' family member created, called "Onionhead." Employees were told wear Onionhead buttons, pull Onionhead cards to place near their work stations and keep only dim lighting in the workplace. None of these practices was work-related. When employees opposed taking part in these religious activities or did not participate fully, they were terminated.

New York Daily News has more on the lawsuit.

Jewish Ancestry of the Late Cardinal John Joseph O'Connor Discovered

The New York Times reported at length yesterday on the newly-discovered Jewish ancestry of the the late Cardinal John Joseph O’Connor.  O'Connor was Cardinal Archbishop of New York for 16 years. It now appears that O'Connor's maternal grandfather was a rabbi, and his mother, who converted to Catholicism in 1908, was born a Jew.  The Cardinal, who apparently never learned of his Jewish roots, was born in 1920 and died in 2000. (Biography.) As Cardinal, O'Connor was strongly supportive of the Jewish community and active in Catholic-Jewish relations.

House Subcommittee Holds Hearing On Religious Liberty In U.S.

Yesterday the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice held a hearing on The State of Religious Liberty In the United States.  Witnesses from Liberty Counsel, Christian Legal Society, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and Alliance Defending Freedom testified.  The full text of each witness' prepared remarks is available online, as is a video of the full hearing.

UPDATE: Christian News (June 11) carries an account of an exchange during the hearing between Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert and Americans United leader Rev. Barry Lynn questioning Lynn's Christian beliefs.

DC Circuit Dismisses Suit By Former Gitmo Detainees Claiming Disruption of Religious Practices

In Allaithi v. Rumsfeld, (DC Cir., June 10, 2014), former Guantanamo detainees brought a damage action under the Alien Tort Statute, as well as under the 1st Amendment and RFRA, against various individuals who authorized and supervised their detention.  At issue in this appeal is the claim by certain of the plaintiffs that after they were cleared by the Combatant Status Review Tribunal, but before they were released, they were mistreated in various ways, including disruption of their religious practices. The appeals court agreed with the district court that the individual defendants were acting within the scope of their employment in carrying out the challenged actions.  Therefore the claims should have been brought against the United States government pursuant to 28 USC Sec. 2679(d), and not against the individuals. Center for Constitutional Rights issued a press release discussing the decision.

Another Lawsuit Is Filed Challenging Alabama's Refusal To Recognize Same-Sex Marriages

On Monday, the ACLU filed a federal lawsuit challenging Alabama's refusal to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. (Press release). The complaint (full text) in Aaron-Brush v. Bentley, (ND AL, June 9, 2014), was filed on behalf of two women who have been together for 17 years and were legally married in Massachusetts in 2012. They have a 7-year old daughter they are raising together, though Alabama law presently bars them from jointly adopting her.  There are already three other lawsuits in federal courts seeking to require Alabama to recognize same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions.

Kentucky City Passes Ordinance Barring LGBT Discrimination, But With Broad Exemption For Faith-Based Institutions

According to Central Kentucky News, on Monday night, the Danville, Kentucky City Commission, by a vote of 4-1, adopted an ordinance barring discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, but with a broad exclusion for all "faith-based institutions."  An earlier version of the ordinance would not have excluded faith-based institutions that receive a majority of their funding from government agencies.  However last month after Sunrise Children's Services which receives 80% of its funding from the government threatened to sue, Council came up with the new draft containing the broader exemption.  An attempt to go back to the initial version was defeated on Monday by a vote of 3-2.  Mayor Bernie Hunstad, who voted against the final version as well, said that he objects to special protection for individuals "who chose to make an unconventional choice in their method of sexual practices."