Slovakia Will Reject Muslim Migrants In EU Redistribution Plan

Last month, the European Union ministers agreed to a plan to redistribute some 32,000 of the 150,000 migrants from war-torn Syria, Iraq, Eritrea and Somalia that have found their way across the Mediterranean to Greece and Italy.  As reported by TRT World, the EU hopes to reach agreement by the end of the year on redistribution of an additional 8,000.  Meanwhile, The Telegraph reported yesterday that while Slovakia has agreed to accept 200 of the migrants, it says it will not accept any Muslims.  An Interior Ministry spokesman said:

[W]e don't have any mosques in Slovakia so how can Muslims be integrated if they are not going to like it here?

EU sources say that while it would be legal to prioritize Christians because they are at extra risk of persecution, rejecting Muslims would be impermissible discrimination. But the Slovakian government says it plans to ask arriving migrants their religion.

7th Circuit: Rule Preventing Former Prison Employee From Marrying Inmate Is Unconstituitonal

In Riker v. Lemmon. (7th Cir., Aug. 14, 2015), the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals held that prison authorities had failed to adequately justify their refusal to allow Rebecca Riker, a former food services employee at an Indiana prison, a one-time visit in order to marry inmate Paul Vest who is serving a 50-year sentence for robbery.  Riker met Vest when she was employed at the prison and Vest worked as a prisoner under her supervision. Riker left her job when it was discovered that she had a romantic relationship with Vest, which included sexual intercourse in a walk-in cooler at the facility. Relying in part on the U.S. Supreme Court's 1987 decision in Turner v. Safley, the 7th Circuit said in part:

The right to marry includes the right to select one’s spouse. See Obergefell, 135 S. Ct. at 2599 (noting “that the right to personal choice regarding marriage is inherent in the concept of individual autonomy” and that there is dignity in individuals’ “autonomy to make such profound choices”). The proper inquiry, therefore, is whether Ms. Riker was prohibited from marrying the spouse of her choosing. Because Ms. Riker has not been left with any alternative means of exercising her right to marry Vest, it is clear that the burden on that right was not minimal. ...

The Department also submits that the prohibition of Ms. Riker’s marriage is necessary to serve as a deterrent to current employees. It submits that “[t]he policy communicates to IDOC employees that if they begin an inappropriate relationship with an offender while working at an IDOC facility, they will not only be held accountable but also will be prevented from seeing the inmate for as long as he or she is incarcerated.” The Department has not provided any evidence, however, to support its contention that prohibiting Ms. Riker’s marriage acts as a deterrent or that such deterrence is necessary.

National Law Journal reports on the decision.

Court Decrees Final Injunction Terms For Monitoring Florida Prison Kosher Meal Policy

As previously reported, in April the U.S. Department of Justice won its long-running lawsuit against the state of Florida over its prisons' kosher meal policy.  Last week in United States of America v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, (SD FL, Aug. 12, 2015), the court settled on the final language for the injunction it issued by separate order.  The parties agreed on the language on accountability and monitoring, but disagreed on the extent the Justice Department would have access to inspect prisons for compliance.  The court largely accepted the Justice Department's proposed language, and gave the federal government access to personnel, prisoners and food facilities so it can monitor compliance. NorthEscambia.com reports on the court's order.

8th Circuit: Preacher's Free Speech Rights Not Infringed By State Fair Rules On Where He Can Stand

In Powell v. Noble, (8th Cir., Aug. 14, 2015), the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the federal district court that a Christian preacher's free expression rights were not infringed when he was barred from delivering his religious message just outside the paid admission area at the Iowa State Fair. The court said in part:

The fair’s rule prohibiting impeding the flow of people in and out of the fairgrounds addresses the need to limit congestion and disruption and to facilitate safe and efficient access to the fair.... Powell retains alternative channels of communication on the fairgrounds.... While these alternatives may not be Powell’s first choice, “‘[t]he First Amendment does not demand unrestricted access to a nonpublic forum merely because use of that forum may be the most efficient means of delivering the speaker’s message.’” .... We also conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in holding Powell is unlikely to succeed in showing the rule against bringing signs attached to poles and sticks to the fair is unreasonable....The state has a valid interest in protecting the safety of fairgoers... Neither are we persuaded by Powell’s argument that the rule is arbitrary because the fair allows mounted poles to support tents and flags and small sticks for the fair’s many food-on-a-stick offerings.

The court however remanded the case to the district court for it to consider whether the State Fair's unwritten rules on access to the fairgrounds are overly vague in violation of the due process clause.  The Des Moines Register reports on the decision.

Comedian Takes On Televangelists Preaching Prosperity Gospel

Comedian John Oliver, host of the HBO late-night show "Last Week Tonight," has gained widespread attention for his Aug. 16 episode (YouTube video of episode) that took on televangelists who preach the Prosperity Gospel.  As reported by the Wall Street Journal, to illustrate the ease of creating a religious organization that can solicit tax-exempt contributions, Oliver filed paperwork to create his own church, Our Lady of Perpetual Exemption. The humorous 20-minute episode argues that some broadcast ministries exploit those who can least afford to donate.

Kentucky Clerk, Continuing Fight Against Issuing Marriage Licenses To Same-Sex Couples, Gets Short Reprieve

Rowan County, Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis is continuing her battle to obtain a religious exemption from the requirement that her office issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.  As previously reported, last week a federal district court issued a preliminary injunction requiring her to end her resistance, at least as to the two same-sex couples suing her.  Davis' office has been refusing to issue marriage licences to anyone.  Yesterday in Miller v. Davis, (ED KY, Aug. 17, 2015), the district court refused to stay its injunction while an appeal to the 6th Circuit plays out.  The court found that Davis is not likely to succeed on the merits in the appeal nor is she likely to suffer irreparable harm without a stay. However the court did grant a shorter stay. The court said "realizing that emotions are running high on both sides of the debate," it would grant a stay while Davis appeals the denial of a longer stay during the appeal.

The Lexington Herald-Leader reports on these developments and reactions to them:

"Here in Morehead, we have a fairness ordinance (protecting the civil rights of gays and lesbians) that our city council passed unanimously in 2013," said Mary Hargis, a retired state worker holding a sign that read "Obey the law."

"So to have a county official on her own turn around and negate all that progress by making us look like backward, inbred hillbillies, she's just reinforcing all the stereotypes people had about us...

[Thanks to Tom Rutledge for the lead.]

UPDATE: On Aug. 19, the district court, saying the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure require it to set an expiration date, issued an order (full text) providing that the stay it issued two days earlier will expire on Aug. 31 unless the 6th Circuit orders something else.

Today Is 100th Anniversary of Anti-Semitic Leo Frank Lynching

The Forward reminds us that today is the 100th anniversary of the anti-Semitic lynching of Leo Frank:

Frank was the superintendent of the National Pencil Factory in Atlanta in 1913 when Mary Phagan, a 13-year-old white employee, was murdered. Frank, 29, was an interloper in Georgia: a northerner and a Jew. The police quickly seized on him as a suspect. His trial, conducted in an atmosphere of rampant anti-Semitism and anti-Northern sentiment, led to his conviction and sentencing to death in the summer of 1913....

During his confinement, Frank’s advocates cast enough doubt on his conviction that Georgia’s governor commuted his sentence to life in prison, in June 1915.

It was a wildly unpopular decision in Georgia and not enough to save Frank’s life. He was moved to a rural prison 100 miles away in Milledgeville where, within a matter of weeks, an inmate slit Frank’s throat.

Frank survived the attack. But on the night of August 16, a lynch mob. organized by the leaders of Cobb County where Phagan’s family lived, stormed the prison. They bundled Frank into a car and drove him 150 miles to their county seat of Marietta, where they lynched him at dawn.

For anyone interested in an excellent and exhaustive history of the case, I recommend Steve Oney, And the Dead Shall Rise, (Vintage Books, 2003).

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• James G. Hodge, Respecting Religious Freedoms and Protecting the Public's Health, (Public Health Reports, Vol. 130, September-October 2015).
• Gad Barzilai, Analysis of Israelis (Jews and Arab-Palestinians) Exploring Law in Society and Society in Law, (International Journal of Law in Context / Volume 11 / Issue 03 / September 2015, pp 361 - 378).
•  Obinuchi Chimezule, Right to Die (Euthanasia) in Nigeria, (July 31, 2015).
• B. Jessie Hill, Change, Dissent, and the Problem of Consent in Religious Organizations, (The Rise of Corporate Religious Liberty, Chad Flanders, Zoë Robinson & Micah Schwartzman eds., Oxford University Press, 2015, Forthcoming).
• Hershey H. Friedman, Destruction of the Second Temple: Lessons for Today's Leaders, (August 11, 2015).
• Jeremy Menchik, Productive Intolerance: Godly Nationalism in Indonesia, (Comparative Studies in Society and History, July 2014).
• Adam Lamparello, Obergefell v. Hodges: How the Supreme Court Should Have Ruled, (August 12, 2015).
• Phoebe E. Arde-Acquah, Salus Populi Suprema Lex Esto: Balancing Civil Liberties and Public Health Interventions in Modern Vaccination Policy, (Washington University Jurisprudence Review, Vol. 7, p. 337, 2015).
• Jeremy Menchik, The Co-Evolution of Sacred and Secular: Islamic Law and Family Planning in Indonesia, (South East Asia Research, 22, 3, pp 359-378, 2014).

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Ahmorae v. Davidson County Sheriff's Office, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105329 (MD TN, Aug. 11, 2015), a Tennessee federal district court dismissed a Muslim inmate's complaint that on one occasion during Ramadan he was not served dinner.

In Sousa v. Wegman, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105420 (ED CA, Aug. 11, 2015), a California federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85208, June 29, 2015) and allowed an inmate to move ahead with his complaint that  he was repeatedly denied attendance at religious services, holiday celebrations, use of the sweat lodge, and formal recognition for his Mexican Indian faith. UPDATE: The court issued a corrected order on Aug. 13 (2015 U.S. Dist. Lexis 107582).

In Pelayo v. Hernandez, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105521 (ED CA, Aug. 11, 2015), a California federal district court dismissed a Christian inmate's complaint that he was not allowed to bring his pocket Bible with him into the dining hall.

In Jaquez v. Birch, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105818 (ND OK, Aug. 12, 2015), an Oklahoma federal district court dismissed an inmate's complaint that he had not been able to see or talk with the jail chaplain.

In Frazier v. Cooper, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106707 (WD PA, Aug. 13, 2015), a Pennsylvania federal magistrate judge dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies a complaint by an inmate who is a member of the Moorish Science Temple of America that his religious practice was being limited.

In Saif'Ullah v. Cruzen, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107490 and in Mohammad-Bey v. Cruzen, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107510 (ND CA, Aug. 13, 2015), a California federal district court permitted inmates to move ahead with their complaint that correctional officers would not allow Muslim inmates to pray in groups larger than four, despite a contrary ruling by the Religious Review Committee.

Investigative Team Appointed To Study East Ramapo NY Schools

According to the New York Times, last Thursday the New York State Education Department appointed a team of three experts led by former New York City School Chancellor Dennis Walcott to study the operations of the struggling East Ramapo school system and offer recommendations. The Times reports:

Last fall, a former federal prosecutor appointed by the state to investigate the district found that the school board, which is dominated by Orthodox Jews, had diverted money from public schools to children who attend local yeshivas, leaving the district in dire financial trouble. The former prosecutor, Henry M. Greenberg, recommended that the state appoint a fiscal monitor with the power to override decisions by the school board. The State Assembly passed a bill in June that would have created such a position, but amid complaints from the East Ramapo school board that it would usurp local control of schools, the bill died in the State Senate.

Mr. Walcott and his team will not have the power to override decisions by the school board. But the state education commissioner, MaryEllen Elia, said in an interview that the department had been in discussions with the school board, and that she hoped the board would be amenable to the experts’ recommendations.

(See prior related posting.)

DC Circuit: Allocation of Royalties To Religious Broadcasters Was Arbitrary and Capricious

Settling Devotional Claimants v. Copyright Royalty Board, (DC Cir., Aug. 14, 2015), is a suit involving a dispute among television ministries on how to divide among themselves the royalties paid by cable operators for re-transmission of the ministries’ television broadcasts for the years 2000-2003.  Under federal law, cable operators can retransmit programs initially aired on a broadcast station without further permission, but must deposit a royalty amount set by statute.  Each year the Copyright Royalty Judges determine how the royalties should be distributed. In an earlier phase of the proceedings the Judges determined the the total amount that should be allocated to devotional-religious programs. This phase of the proceedings involved the distribution of that amount among two competing groups-- a group of 23 ministries whose copyright broadcasts were distributed (the Settling Devotional Claimants) and a second group (Independent Producers Group) that claimed to represent 7 other ministries, but was held by the Royalty Judges to properly represent only four others. The Royalty Judges rejected the methodologies urged by both parties and instead used its own approach to allocate the royalties between the two groups.  The Court of Appeals held that the Royalty Judges' allocations were arbitrary and capricious, saying in part:

[The Devotional Claimants]  argue that, after the Royalty Judges ... simply split the difference between the two parties, and that decision was arbitrary and capricious and unsupported by substantial evidence. We agree with the Devotional Claimants..... King Solomon was not subject to the Administrative Procedure Act; the Royalty Judges are. 

DC Circuit Rejects Establishment Clause Challenge To ACA Religious Conscience Exemption

In Cutler v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, DC Cir., Aug. 14, 2015), the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit rejected an Establishment Clause challenge to the religious conscience exemption in the Affordable Care Act.  The ACA exempts from the individual mandate members of traditional religious groups such as the Amish and Mennonites who are conscientiously opposed to acceptance of health benefits and whose sect makes provision for their dependent members. Plaintiff Jeffrey Cutler objected for personal, not religious, reasons to purchasing insurance that complies with ACA requirements. The court said in part:

The religious exemption in the Affordable Care Act, like its counterpart in the Social Security Act, accommodates religion by exempting all believers whose faith system provides an established, alternative support network that ensures individuals will not later seek to avail themselves of the federal benefits for which they did not contribute. Cutler is correct that the Affordable Care Act withholds a similar exemption for non-believers. But the Supreme Court has repeatedly held that “the government may accommodate religious practices without violating the Establishment Clause....

Suit Says Florida Will Not Issue Correct Birth Certificates To Married Lesbian Couples

A lawsuit was filed in federal district court in Florida yesterday challenging the birth certificate policy of Florida's Bureau of Vital Statistics.  The complaint (full text) in Chin v. Armstrong, (ND FL, Aug. 13, 2015), alleges:

When a child is born to a woman who is married to another woman ... the Bureau ... will not issue accurate birth certificates listing both parents.... Instead, the Bureau will issue only a certificate that falsely indicates that the child has only one parent and that omits the mother’s spouse as the child’s second parent.

The suit contends that this infringes plaintiffs' fundamental right to marry as well as denying them equal protection of the laws. Equality Florida Action issued a press release on the filing of the lawsuit.

Kentucky Clerk Continues To Refuse To Issue Marriage Licenses, Despite Injunction

Continuing to maintain her religious objections to issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, Rowan County, Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis yesterday filed with the federal district court a motion (full text) to stay the court's Aug. 12 preliminary injunction pending appeal. (See prior posting.) Meanwhile, as reported by AP, Davis' office continued to refuse to issue marriage licenses. Staff said Davis was on vacation, and others in the office also authorized to issue licenses refused to do so.  The staff handed one couple a Post-it note with the phone number of Davis' lawyers, Liberty Counsel. Attorneys for plaintiffs in the case are considering asking the court to hold Davis in contempt.

Court Upholds Order Against Bakery that Refused Wedding Cake For Same-Sex Couple

In Craig v. Masterpiece Cakeshop, Inc., (CO App., Aug. 13, 2015). a Colorado appellate court, in a 64-page opinion, affirmed the decision of the Colorado Civil Rights Commission (see prior posting) that a bakery's refusal to create a wedding cake for a same-sex couple violates Colorado's public accommodation law, and that the Commission's cease and desist order does not infringe the bakery owner's free exercise or free speech rights. The court rejected the bakery's claim that its refusal to create the cake was "because of" its opposition to same-sex marriage, not because of its opposition to plaintiffs' sexual orientation. It held that because same-sex marriage is entered into only (or predominately) by gays, lesbians and bisexuals, the conduct cannot be divorced from status.

The court rejected defendants' argument that requiring them to create the wedding cake would amount to unconstitutionally compelled speech:

such conduct, even if compelled by the government, is not sufficiently expressive to warrant First Amendment protections.

Finally the court concluded that the cease and desist order did not violate the Christian owner's free exercise rights under the state and federal constitutions because the Colorado Law Against Discrimination is a neutral law of general applicability. Colorado Springs Gazette reports on the decision.

In Israel, Knesset Committee Rejects Agriculture Ministry Rules On Kapparot Ritual

Jerusalem Post reports today that in Israel, the  Knesset's Economic Affairs Committee has rejected rules issued by the Agriculture Ministry to strictly regulate the controversial pre-Yom Kippur ceremony of kapparot.  The ceremony involves the slaughter of a chicken after it is first lifted oven one's head as a way of symbolically shedding one's sins.  The Agriculture Ministry rules required strict limits and inspections to insure that the birds do not suffer.  However the Knesset Committee's chairman said the rules were overly stringent and would have effectively prevented the practice.  During committee hearings on the rules yesterday, a Knesset member from the United Torah Judaism Party threatened that his party would topple the coalition government if the regulations were upheld.

Guam Legislature Passes Marriage Equality and LGBT Employment Discrimination Laws

Pacific Daily News reports that the Guam legislature yesterday passed the Guam Marriage Equality Act (full text), aligning the U.S. Territory's laws with the a district court's decision in June specifically striking down Guam's same-sex marriage ban. (See prior posting.)

The legislature this week also passed the Guam Employment Nondiscrimination Act of 2015 (full text), adding bans on employment discrimination based on gender identity or expression; sexual orientation; and veteran or military status. The law includes an exemption for religious and educational institutions that are exempt from the religious discrimination provisions of Title VII of the 1964 federal Civil Rights Act. HRC Blog has more on the new law.

Court Says Kentucky Clerk Cannot Refuse To Issue Marriage Licences

In Miller v. Davis, (ED KY, Aug. 12, 2015), a Kentucky federal district court granted a preliminary injunction barring Rowan County, Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis from continuing her policy of refusing to issue all marriage licenses because of her religious objections to issuing licences to same-sex couples.  The injunction enjoins Davis from applying the policy to future marriage license requests submitted by plaintiffs in the case.

Rejecting free exercise, free speech, religious test and Kentucky Religious Freedom Act arguments, the court held:

Davis remains free to practice her Apostolic Christian beliefs. She may continue to attend church twice a week, participate in Bible Study and minister to female inmates at the Rowan County Jail. She is even free to believe that marriage is a union between one man and one woman, as many Americans do. However, her religious convictions cannot excuse her from performing the duties that she took an oath to perform as Rowan County Clerk.

The Kentucky ACLU issued a press release announcing the decision.  AP reports on the decisionl  Davis immediately filed a Notice of Appeal (full text). [Thanks to Tom Rutledge for the lead.]

Kansas Federal District Court Implements Obergefell Holding

Even though the U.S. Supreme Court decided in the Obergefell case that same-sex marriages must be recognized, lower courts still need to tie up loose to make the ruling effective nationwide.  In Marie v. Mosier, (D. KA, Aug. 10, 2015), a Kansas federal district court issued a declaratory judgment that Kansas’ same-sex marriage laws (and related policies) violate the Constitution and thus are void. However in light of claims by Kansas officials that the state is voluntarily complying with the Obergefell holding, the court delayed issuing a permanent injunction to determine whether the issue is moot, saying:

In the Court’s view, the prudent course of action is to let defendants finish updating their policies and practices to conform to Obergefell’s new rule of constitutional law. The Court thus defers, for now, the portion of plaintiffs’ summary judgment motion seeking injunctive relief. Should subsequent events reveal that the Court’s hopefulness about Kansas officials’ pledge to comply with Obergefell is misplaced, plaintiffs may supplement their motion for summary judgment on their claims for injunctive relief...

SCOTUSblog discusses the opinion.

Canadian Court Says Aboriginal Religious Freedom Not Infringed By Approval of Ski Resort

In Ktunaxa Nation Council v. Minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations, (BC Ct. App., Aug. 6, 2015), the Court of Appeal for the Canadian province of British Columbia held that the provincial government did not infringe the religious freedom of the aboriginal Ktunaxa Nation when it granted Glacier Resorts, Ltd. the right to build a year-round ski resort in the Jumbo Valley region of southeastern British Columbia’s Purcell Mountains. A number of accommodations in the plans were made to accommodate the Ktunaxa. However, according to the Ktunaxa:

the proposed resort lies at the heart of a sacred area of paramount spiritual importance within their claimed traditional territory, as it is the Grizzly Bear Spirit’s home. They claimed that if the development of the resort was permitted, the Spirit would leave, and they would no longer be able to receive physical or spiritual assistance and guidance from the Spirit, which would have a profound negative impact on their identity and culture.

The court held that Sec. 2(a) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that protects freedom of conscience and religion

does not apply to protect the vitality of religious communities where the vitality of the community is predicated on the assertion by a religious group that, to preserve the communal dimension of its religious beliefs, others are required to act or refrain from acting and behave in a manner consistent with a belief that they do not share.

The Townsman reports on the decision.

Challenge To A.A. Requirerment In Probationary Massage License Survives Motion To Dismiss

In Sundquist v. State of Nebraska, (D NE, Aug. 10, 2015), plaintiff Marvin Sundquist who held a probationary license to practice massage therapy in Nebraska challenged the constitutionality of a requirement that he attend Alcoholics Anonymous meetings in order to keep his probationary license.  He claimed religious objections to AA which has substantial religious components in it.  His licensing probation compliance monitor refused his proposed secular alternative.  A Nebraska federal district court held:

In sum, the Court finds that Sundquist has alleged a plausible claim under the Establishment Clause, and that defendants Vierk and Schuldt are not entitled to qualified immunity. It remains to be seen, of course, whether Sundquist can actually prove his claim and prove that he suffered actual damages—but he should have the opportunity to do so. 

Indian Court Bars Jain Practice of Santhara As Suicide

In India, the Rajasthan High Court, acting on a public interest petition, held that Santhara, a traditional Jain practice of starving oneself to death to attain salvation (background), is suicide under the Indian Penal Code. Thus Sec. 306 outlawing abeting of suicide and Section 309 outlawing attempted suicide apply. The court said in part:

The respondents failed to establish that Santhara is an essential religious practice without which the following of Jain religion is not permissible.

According to the Calcutta Telegraph, the activist who filed the suit says: "... Santhara is a way devised by the family to get rid of the economic burden of caring for its elderly." Jain organizations say they will appeal the decision.

Ohio Supreme Court Board Issues Advisory Opinion On Judges' Refusal To Perform Same-Sex Marriages

The Ohio Supreme Court's Board of Professional Conduct has issued an advisory opinion on Judicial Performance of Civil Marriages of Same-Sex Couples.  In Opinion 2015-1 (Aug. 7, 2015), the Board concluded:

A judge who performs civil marriages may not refuse to perform same-sex marriages while continuing to perform opposite-sex marriages, based upon his or her personal, moral, and religious beliefs, acts contrary to the judicial oath of office and Jud. Cond. R. 1.1, 1.2, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.11, and Prof. Cond. R. 8.4(g).

A judge who takes the position that he or she will discontinue performing all marriages, in order to avoid marrying same-sex couples based on his or her personal, moral, or religious beliefs, may be interpreted as manifesting an improper bias or prejudice toward a particular class. The judge’s decision also may raise reasonable questions about his or her impartiality in legal proceedings where sexual orientation is at issue and consequently would require disqualification under Jud. Cond. R. 2.11.

The Board refused to address questions regarding assignment or rotation of judges conducting marriages at a court.

Yesterday's Columbus Dispatch reported on the advisory opinion. The issue was highlighted in Ohio last month when Toledo Municipal Court Judge C. Allen McConnell's bailiff told a same-sex couple who had been issued a marriage license that McConnell does not do "these types of marriages." (See prior posting.)

Supreme Court Is Asked To Review New Jersey Reparative Therapy Ban

Yesterday a petition for certiorari (full text) was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in Doe v. Governor of New Jersey.  In the case, the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals  rejected a constitutional challenge to a New Jersey statute that bans "sexual orientation change efforts" counseling for minors. Liberty Counsel issued a press release announcing the filing of the petition for review.

Judge Orders Marriage and Writing Bible Verses As Conditions of Probation

KLTV News reported last week on the July sentencing hearing in Smith County, Texas of  Josten Bundy for assaulting his girlfriend Elizabeth Jayne's former boyfriend. The two got into a fight when the former boyfriend said disrespectful things about  Elizabeth.  At the sentencing hearing, Judge Randall Rogers said he would grant probation instead of 15 days in jail if Bundy married Jayne within 30 days.  The probation terms also included writing Bible verses and getting counseling.  Yesterday Americans United released a letter (full text) that it sent to Judge Rogers arguing that the probation terms violate the Establishment Clause and the right to privacy.

UPDATE: The Freedom From Religion Foundation announced that on Aug. 13 it filed a formal complaint against Judge Rogers with the Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct.

Marijuana Possession Conviction of Rastafarian Does Not Violate Free Exercise Clause

In State of New Jersey v. Forchion, (NJ App., Aug. 7, 2015), the New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division in an appeal of a conviction for possessing marijuana rejected a claim by a Rastafarian that his First Amendment free exercise rights are infringed by criminalizing the possession of cannabis which is a sacrament used in his faith.  The court held that the statute is neutral and generally applicable, and "the fact that marijuana may be medically prescribed for some New Jersey citizens does not create a secular exemption that triggers strict scrutiny analysis."

Article Explores Barriers To Abortion Rights For Jail Inmates

Truthout yesterday published a lengthy investigative article on the barriers sometimes thrown up by jails to prevent women inmates from obtaining abortions. The article begins:

Should sheriffs and other jail staff be allowed to decide whether a woman can obtain an abortion? When a woman is arrested and incarcerated, should her reproductive rights be stripped from her? Based on their actions against a woman in custody this past month, Rick Singleton, the sheriff of Lauderdale County Jail in Florence, Alabama, and district attorney Chris Connolly seem to think so. They may also have set a precedent for any other law enforcement seeking to prevent women from seeking abortions—throw up enough obstacles and she'll decide to carry the pregnancy to term.

Houston Pastors' Group Sues Mayor For Legal Fees and Damages In Fight Over Equal Rights Ordinance

Now that the Texas Supreme Court has ordered the city of Houston to place a referendum on the ballot that seeks to repeal Houston's Equal Rights Ordinance (HERO) (see prior posting), the Houston Area Pastors Council announced last week that it has filed a lawsuit in state court against Houston, Texas mayor Annise Parker to recover legal fees and damages it incurred in the litigation.  Much of the opposition to HERO came from pastors who objected to its protection of transgender rights, and the mayor created particular controversy by initially subpoenaing the pastors' sermons and other documents  relating to their support of the ordinance. (See prior posting.) Houston Chronicle and the Houston Memorial Examiner report on this latest lawsuit which accuses Mayor Parker with interfering with citizens' right to vote.

RLUIPA Lawsuit Challenges Denial of Permit To Christian School

According to the Livingston (MI) Daily, on Friday Livingston Christian Schools filed a RLUIPA lawsuit in federal district court against Genoa County, Michigan over Genoa Township's denial to it of a special use permit that would have allowed it to relocate to the Brighton Church of the Nazarene facilities.  In turn, Light of the World Academy planned to move into the facility in Pickney that Livingston Christian would vacate. The township board voted 4-3 to deny the permit that had been recommended by the planning commission because of traffic concerns.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Rex Ahdar, A Real Threat or a Mere Shadow? School Chaplaincy Programs and the Secular State, (University of Queensland Law Journal, vol 33. no 1 (2014): 29-41).
• Joshua C. Tate, Episcopal Power and Royal Jurisdiction in Angevin England, (Studies in Canon Law and Common Law in Honor of R.H. Helmholz, Robbins Collection Studies in Comparative Legal History (Troy L. Harris ed., 2015), pp. 15-26).
• Jayanth K. Krishnan & Patrick W. Thomas, Surveying Key Aspects of Sociolegal Scholarship on India: An Overview, (Annual Review of Law and Social Science (2015, Forthcoming)).
• Christopher Tomlins, Debt, Death, and Redemption: Toward a Soterial-Legal History of the Turner Rebellion, (David S. Cowan and Dan Wincott, editors, Exploring the Legal in Socio-Legal Studies (London: Palgrave-Macmillan), January 2016, Forthcoming).
• Erwin Chemerinsky & Michele Goodwin, Compulsory Vaccination Laws are Constitutional, (Northwestern University Law Review, Vol. 110, 2015/16 Forthcoming).
• Christopher C. Lund, Leaving Disestablishment to the Political Process, (Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy, Vol. 10, p. 45, 2014).
• Sarah Beth D'Alessandro, Commerce in Human Organs: A Study of Jewish Legal Themes Underlying a Contemporary Controversy, (August 5, 2015).
• Daniel Golebiewski, Roman Catholic Traditions and LGBT Rights in Poland and France, (Rights for All? Sexual Orientation, Religious Traditions, and the Challenge of Inclusion The Center for International Human Rights, John Jay College, February 2015).
• Hillel Y. Levin, Allan J. Jacobs & Kavita Arora, To Accommodate or Not to Accommodate: (When) Should the State Regulate Religion to Protect the Rights of Children and Third Parties?, (UGA Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2016-24 (Aug. 2015)).

From SSRN (Marriage):

• Robin Fretwell Wilson & Anthony Michael Kreis, Embracing Compromise: Marriage Equality and Religious Liberty in the Political Process, (Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law, Vol. 15, No. 485, 2014).
• Doron M. Kalir, Same-Sex Marriage and Jewish Law: Time for a New Paradigm? (Cleveland-Marshall Legal Studies Paper No. 15-284, Aug. 2015).
• Toni M. Massaro, The Lawfulness of the Same-Sex Marriage Decisions: Charles Black on Obergefell, Arizona Legal Studies Discussion Paper No. 15-27 (July 2015).

From SSRN (Islam):

• Arolda Elbasani & Olivier Roy, Islam in the Post-Communist Balkans: Alternative Pathways to God, (Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, Online First, Forthcoming).
• Arolda Elbasani, Islam and Democracy at the Fringes of Europe: The Role of Useful Historical Legacies, (Politics and Religion 8 (2), 334-357, 2015).
• J. Robert Brown, Secularism, Sharia, and the Turkish Financial Markets, (Brooklyn Journal of International Law, Vol. 40, No. 2, 2015).

From SmartCILP and elsewhere:

• Dallan F. Flake, Bearing Burdens: Religious Accommodations that Adversely Affect Coworker Morale, 76 Ohio State Law Journal 169-216 (2015).
• Leslie C. Griffin, Hobby Lobby: The Crafty Case that Threatens Women's Rights and Religious Freedom, [Abstract], 42 Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly 641-693 (2015).
• Eric Rassbach, Is Hobby Lobby Really a Brave New World? Litigation Truths About Religious Exercise by For-Profit Organizations, [Abstract], 42 Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly 625-639 (2015).
• Gerald Walpin, Five Justices Have Transformed the First Amendment's Freedom of Religion to Freedom from Religion, 31 Touro Law Review 187-220 (2015).
• Richard W. Garnett, John D. Inazu & Michael W. McConnell, How to Protect Endangered Religious Groups You Admire, Christianity Today, (Aug. 4, 2015).
• Dodd-Frank, the Financial Crisis, and a Christian View of Financial Markets. Articles by Paul J. Foley, Tory L. Lucas and student Joshua C. Dawson; abstract by Rodney Chrisman; note by Kaitlyn E. Evans. 9 Liberty University Law Review 445-595 (2015).

IRS Seeks Nominees For Tax Exempt Advisory Committee

The Internal Revenue Service has issued a Notice And Request For Applicants Or Nominations for vacancies on the Advisory Committee on Tax Exempt and Government Entities. (Federal Register, Aug. 10, 2015). Applications or nominations must be received by Sept. 4.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Williams v. Trueblood, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100636 (WD AR, July 31, 2015), an Arkansas federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30546, Feb. 9, 2015) and dismissed the complaint of an inmate whose faith was black magic Voodoo that when Christian preachers from the community periodically visited the jail, they would conduct worship services and play recordings of Christian music in the prisoner pod, and his complaint that the chaplain refused to put books about death on the book cart.

In Hulbert v. Robinson, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100700 (WD VA, July 31, 2015), a Virginia federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing a Wiccan inmate's complaint that the prison's single-vendor policy and ban on direct in-kind donations denied him access to items he needed for Wiccan rituals.

In Evans v. Muniz, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101207 (ND CA, July 31, 2015), a California federal district court allowed a Muslim inmate to move ahead with his complaint that he was not provided with Halal food for a period of 16 months.

In Abdullah v. Cruzen, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101191 and in Alim v. Cruzen, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101205 (ND CA, July 31, 2015), a California federal district court allowed a Muslim inmate to move ahead with his claim that correctional officers had created an "underground rule" prohibiting SQSP Muslim prisoners from congregating in groups of more than four for daily prayers, and retaliated against him for filing a complaint about it.

In Al-Azim v. Everett, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101292 (ED VA, Aug. 3, 2015), a Virginia federal district court permitted various of the inmate plaintiffs to move ahead with complaints regarding refusal to provide a diet consistent with Nation of Islam teachings, refusing sufficient time of NOI prayer and classes and refusal to allow plaintiffs to purchase CDs of weekly sermons by Louis Farrakhan.

In Lilly v. Texas Department of Criminal Justice, 2015 Tex. App. LEXIS 8142 (TX App., Aug. 4, 2015), a Texas state appeals court in a 2-1 decision affirmed the dismissal on statute of limitations grounds of a suit by an inmate who is a member of the House of Yahweh who was refused kosher meals.

In Quinn v. Management & Training Corp., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101924 (SD MS, Aug. 4, 2015) a Mississippi federal district court reinstated an inmate's complaint that officers would not allow him to claim Voodoo as his religion on prison paperwork.

In Larios v. United States Gov't & His Religion, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103205 (ED NY, Aug. 5, 2015), a New York federal district court dismissed with leave to amend an inmate's complaint that  that his placement among the general prison population violated his rights under RFRA.

Oklahoma Supreme Court Denies Rehearing In 10 Commandments Case, With Lengthy Opinions

In an Order dated July 27, 2015, the Oklahoma Supreme Court by a 7-2 vote denied a rehearing in Prescott v. Oklahoma Capitol Preservation Commission, in which the court in June held that a Ten Commandments monument must be removed from the statehouse grounds. (See prior posting.)  The Order denying a rehearing was accompanied by 4 separate concurring opinions and one dissenting opinion (full text), which are much lengthier than the original opinion.

2nd Circuit Withdraws Earlier License Plate Opinion In Light of Supreme Court's Walker Decision

In May in Children First Foundation, Inc. v. Fiala (full text), the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a decision by the New York Department of Motor Vehicles to refuse to issue custom license plates carrying the slogan "Choose Life."  In reaching its conclusion the court held that custom license plates constitute private speech. Subsequently the U.S. Supreme Court in the Walker case held that specialty license plates are government speech. (See prior posting.) Now in Children First Foundation, Inc. v. Fiala, (2d Cir., Aug. 5, 2015), the 2nd Circuit granted a petition for rehearing, withdrew portions of its earlier opinion, vacated the district court's opinion and remanded the case to the district court for further proceedings n light of the Walker decision. New York Law Journal reports on the court's latest action.

2nd Circuit Upholds ACA Contraceptive Mandate Accommodation For Religious Non-Profits

Yesterday the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals joined six other Circuits in upholding the Obama Administration’s accommodation for religious non-profits that object to the requirement under the Affordable Care Act to furnish their employees health insurance that includes contraceptive coverage.  In Catholic Health Care System v. Burwell, (2d Cir., Aug. 7, 2015), the court rejected plaintiffs’ RFRA challenges, holding that it must apply an objective test in deciding whether a “substantial burden” has been place on plaintiffs’ religious exercise.  It is not enough that plaintiffs sincerely believe that a substantial burden has been imposed. It is up to the court to determine the magnitude of the burden.  The court said in part:

Plaintiffs ... argue that the objectively insubstantial burden of filing either the opt-out form or the letter to HHS is substantial because it renders them complicit in bringing about consequences forbidden by their religion, namely the provision of contraceptive coverage by the government and third parties. Although third parties ultimately bear the burden of providing contraceptive coverage, Plaintiffs contend that their participation is essential to this coverage…..

When third parties step in and provide contraceptive coverage after Plaintiffs opt out, they do so not because Plaintiffs have opted out, but rather because federal law requires or incentivizes them to provide such coverage. The accommodation functions not as a “trigger,” but rather as a means of identifying and exempting those employers with religious objections. Once Plaintiffs indicate their desire to have no involvement in the provision of contraceptive coverage, the government steps in and acts to ensure contraceptive coverage without any participation by Plaintiffs. Thus, Plaintiffs’ decision to opt out is not the cause of the ultimate 3 contraceptive coverage; rather this coverage happens in spite of them....

Plaintiffs may certainly object to this subsequent action by the government and third parties based on their sincere religious beliefs, and we reiterate that we do not doubt the sincerity or rationality of Plaintiffs’ beliefs. But just because Plaintiffs feel complicit in these third party actions does not mean that the regulations impose a “burden” on their religious practice, much less a burden that is “substantial” under RFRA. While a plaintiff’s “religious views may not accept [the] distinction between individual and governmental conduct,” the law does.

New York Times reports on the decision.

Do State RFRAs Apply To Eminent Domain Proceedings?

The Daily Signal this week reports on a lawsuit in Houston, Texas making innovative use of the state's Religious Freedom Restoration Act to challenge an eminent domain proceeding.  The Houston Housing Authority is seeking to take two empty parcels of land belonging to the Latter Day Deliverance Revival Center as part of an urban renewal project.  The church says it acquired the parcels as part of a future expansion plan for the church, and that it uses the land for ministry activities. The church filed suit arguing that the Housing Authority must meet the compelling interest/ least restrictive means tests of RFRA before it may take the property which the church refuses to sell. Applying RFRA standards would make its acquisition extremely difficult.

11th Circuit Upholds Alabama's Prison Grooming Rules Despite Supreme Court's Remand After Holt v. Hobbs Decision

After the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this year decided Holt v. Hobbs, concluding that RLUIPA invalidated the Arkansas prison system's grooming requirements as applied to a Muslim inmate seeking to grow a one-half inch beard, it remanded for further consideration an Alabama case in which Native American inmates challenged grooming requirements banning their long hair. (See prior posting.) Deciding the case on remand, in Knight v. Thompson, (11th Cir., Aug. 5, 2015), the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals held that despite Holt, the Alabama grooming requirements are valid. The 11th Circuit distinguished Holt:

While Holt sought to grow a ½-inch beard, such that the Department had to show how denying him a ½-inch beard actually furthered its compelling interests, the Plaintiffs here request a complete exemption of long, unshorn hair from the ADOC’s short-hair policy....

[T]he “detailed record developed” below distinguishes this case from Holt, where the lower courts gave “unquestioning deference” to prison officials’ conclusory and speculative assertions. As we stated in our previous opinion, the ADOC has “shown that Plaintiffs’ requested exemption poses actual security, discipline, hygiene, and safety risks” and neither we nor Plaintiffs can “point to a less restrictive alternative that accomplishes the ADOC’s compelling goals.”

The 11th Circuit reinstated its prior opinion in the case, with modifications in Section 3(b)(ii) of the opinion. (Full text of modified opinion.) AP reports on the decision.

Suit In Israeli Court Charges Administration of Temple Mount Violates Religious Discrimination Ban

Arutz Sheva and JNS reported yesterday on an interesting lawsuit filed this week in Israel in Jerusalem's District Court.  Jewish activist and attorney Baruch Ben-Yosef has sued the Palestinian Authority, Jordan and the Islamic Movement group in Israel, essentially claiming that they are violating Israel's equivalent of a public accommodation law by limiting Jewish access to the Temple Mount.

The suit alleges violation of an Israeli law enacted in 2000 that prohibits operators of public sites from barring admission on the basis of religion, race, nationality, gender or political affiliation. The suit charges defendants with discriminatory practices against Jews on the Temple Mount. Jewish access is limited to certain times, and Jewish prayer on the Mount is banned. The suit charges that inciting of violence on the Temple Mount is aimed at decreasing Jewish visitors.  The suit also challenges Jordan's claim of sovereignty over the Temple Mount in light of Israel's control over the site taken in the 1967 Six Day War. The Temple Mount is currently administered by the  Islamic Waqf that is controlled by Jordan.  However security is handled by Israeli police.

Kentucky County Clerk Files Third-Party Complaint Against Governor In Battle Over Same-Sex Marriage Licenses

As previously reported, in July the Kentucky ACLU filed a federal class-action lawsuit against Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis who is refusing to issue marriage licences to anyone because of her religious objections to issuing them to same-sex couples. On Tuesday, Davis responded by filing a third-party complaint in the suit against Kentucky Governor Steven Beshear as well as the state official responsible for marriage license forms.  Her third-party complaint (full text) in Miller v. Davis, (ED KY, filed 8/4/2015) alleges in part:

The Commonwealth of Kentucky, acting through Governor Beshear, has deprived Davis of her religious conscience rights guaranteed by the United States and Kentucky Constitutions and laws, by insisting that Davis issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples contrary to her conscience, based on her sincerely held religious beliefs. Because of Governor Beshear’s open declaration that Davis has no such rights, Governor Beshear has exposed Davis to the Plaintiffs’ underlying lawsuit, in which the Plaintiffs claim a constitutional right to a Kentucky marriage license issued specifically by Davis. Governor Beshear is not only liable to Davis for Plaintiffs’ claims, but is also obligated to effect Kentucky marriage licensing policies that uphold Davis’s rights of religious conscience.

Liberty Counsel issued a press release announcing the filing of the complaint. AP reports on the filing.

Suit Challenges Prof's Firing For Becoming Pregnant Out of Wedlock

A former Assistant Professor of Exercise Science at Northwest Christian University in Eugene, Oregon filed a discrimination suit this week after she was fired for becoming pregnant out of wedlock.  The complaint (full text) in Richardson v. Northwest Christian University, (OR Cir. Ct., filed 8/4/2015), contends that when plaintiff Coty Richardson became pregnant by her partner with whom she has had a 12 year relationship. the University gave her an ultimatum:

she had to either (1) proclaim the pregnancy a mistake and dissociate with the father of her child or (2) marry him immediately and provide proof of their union. Dr. Lindsay [Vice President for Academic Affairs] told Ms. Richardson that having a child out of wedlock while still continuing a relationship with the father was inconsistent with the University’s core values and mission and set a “bad example” for the students. When Ms. Richardson refused the University’s demands and requested privacy in her personal life, she was locked out of the University and her employment was terminated.

Among other things, the suit claims violations of Oregon's ban on employment discrimination on the basis of  pregnancy, gender and marital status. It also claims discrimination on the basis of religion, i.e. her belief that it is appropriate for her, as a Christian, to wait until she and her partner are financially, practically, and emotionally ready for marriage. Wall Street Journal reports on the lawsuit.

9 Federal Agencies Propose Rules On Grants To Faith-Based Organizations

Yesterday nine federal agencies issued Notices of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRMs) to implement many of the recommendations made in 2010 by President Obama's  Advisory Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. (See prior posting.) In November 2010 President Obama signed Executive Order 13559 approving a number of the recommendations.  Yesterday's actions constitute the next step in assuring that agencies providing grants to faith-based organizations implement these recommendations.  As described by the White House in a blog post from the Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships:

The proposed rules clarify the principle that organizations offering explicitly religious activities may not subsidize those activities with direct federal financial assistance and must separate such activities in time or location from programs supported with direct federal financial assistance.  For example, if a faith-based provider offers a Bible study as well as a federally supported job training program, the Bible study must be privately funded and separated in time or location from the job training program. 

The NPRMs also propose new protections for beneficiaries or prospective beneficiaries of social service programs that are supported by direct federal financial assistance.  In the proposed rules, the agencies set forth a notice to beneficiaries and prospective beneficiaries that informs them of these protections.  These notices would make it clear, for example, that beneficiaries may not be discriminated against on the basis of religion or religious belief or be required to participate in any religious activities and advises beneficiaries that they may request an alternative provider if they object to the religious character of their current provider.

At the same time, the NPRMs assure religious providers of their equal ability to compete for government funds and of continuing protections for their religious identity like the ability of providers to use religious terms in their organizational names and to include religious references in mission statements and in other organizational documents. ...

Links to the proposals from each agency can be found at the end of the White House blog post.  Both Americans United and the ADL issued statements welcoming yesterday's developments, but expressed concern that the proposed rules do not bar faith-based groups from hiring on the basis of religion in federally funded programs.

County Will Consider Moving Memorial Containing Ichthus

At its meeting today, the Boone County, Missouri Commission will hear the first reading of a proposal to recommend moving of a monument, now on the county courthouse grounds, to the Columbia City Cemetery to alleviate church-sate concerns. (News Release.) As reported by the Columbia Daily Tribune, the monument, erected with private funds in 1992, is a tribute to two Boone County men killed in Operation Desert Storm. At the bottom of the monument is an Ichthus (Christian fish) symbol.  In 2014, after a complaint about the monument from Americans United, the County Commission ordered the Ichthus symbol covered with a plaque reading "Dedicated in 1992."  Now the County Commission has obtained a lengthy opinion of counsel (full text) concluding that continued location and maintenance with public funds of the memorial on the courthouse grounds would likely be found by a court to violate the Establishment Clause and church-state separation requirements of the Missouri Constitution.  Today's resolution will propose moving the monument and removing the plaque covering the Ichthus symbol. It will also consider a policy on future monuments.

Iowa State School Board Will Consider Challenge To Religious Choral Music In High Schools

At its meeting tomorrow, the Iowa Board of Education will consider the recommendation of an administrative law judge rejecting a family's challenge to the religious nature of music performed by the high school choirs in the New Hampton Community School District.  According to yesterday's Des Moines Register, the parents particularly pointed to the choirs' closing with the hymn In This Very Room which they perform holding hands and encircling the audience. The choirs also conduct a "Church Tour," performing in various churches in the community.  The school board says that a large percentage of choral music that has been written is religious, so it would be difficult to limit choirs to secular pieces. It said the church tours allowed students to experience different acoustics and blending of sounds, and that students did not attend religious services while performing.  The state school board's decision can be appealed to the courts.

Milwaukee Archdiocese Settles Remaining Abuse Claims In Bankruptcy Reorganization

The Archdiocese of Milwaukee announced yesterday that it has reached a collective settlement with survivors of clergy sexual abuse that will permit it to complete its four-and-one-half year old Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Reorganization. Key details of the settlement are set out in a summary posted on the Archdiocese's website. Under the settlement, 330 survivors will share $21 million. In addition a $500,000 therapy fund will be set up. 92 additional claimants whose claims were not substantiated will receive $2000 each. The funds for the settlement will come from various sources, including parishes and insurers.  The Cemetery Perpetual Care Trust whose liability has been the subject of extensive litigation will lend the Archdiocese $3 million; reimburse the Archdiocese for $5 million of past cemetery care expenses; and contribute $8 million to settle all claims against its assets.

Attorneys' fees so far have totaled $18.5 million, with additional fees capped at $1.25 million.  Fox 6 News reports that the settlement will be submitted to the bankruptcy court in an Aug. 24 filing, with a hearing scheduled for Nov. 9.  The article also carries the negative reaction to the settlement by advocates for abuse victims, as well as Archbishop Jerome Listecki's favorable reaction to the settlement.

10th Circuit: Oklahoma's License Plate Design Survives Compelled Speech Challenge

In Cressman v. Thompson, (10th Cir., Aug. 4, 2015), the U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a compelled speech challenge to Oklahoma's standard vehicle license plates that depict a Native American shooting an arrow towards the sky. Plaintiff claims that the depiction is based on a sculpture derived from a Native American legend, and that, in violation of his Christian beliefs, it teaches there are multiple gods and the arrow is an intermediary for prayer.

Judge Holmes' majority opinion held that even though the U.S. Supreme Court's recent Walker decision held that license plates are government speech, that does not settle the question of whether plaintiff has been compelled to appear to endorse the government's message. He went on:

at bottom, Mr. Cressman’s claim fails because he cannot demonstrate that the Native American image is, in fact, speech to which he objects. At least in the context of its mass reproduction on Oklahoma’s standard vehicle license plate, the Native American image is not an exercise of self-expression entitled to pure-speech protection. The image may constitute symbolic speech, but the only conceivable message a reasonable observer would glean from the license plate is one to which Mr. Cressman emphatically does not object—namely, a message that communicates Oklahoma’s Native American culture and heritage.

Judge McHugh concurring objected to the majority's focus on whether the depiction involved pure speech or symbolic expression. She said in part:

[O]nce it is determined the license plate is speech, the restrictions on the Oklahoma government’s right to compel a private individual to carry its message apply equally, irrespective of whether the individual is compelled to speak through words, actions, symbols, or gestures....

As the majority has explained in detail, Mr. Cressman does not disagree with the message Oklahoma intended to convey with its standard license plate.... And he has directed us to no evidence supporting his assertion that third parties would interpret the graphic as a message promoting pantheism, the message with which he disagrees.

AP reports on the decision.

Federal Disabilities Education Act Does Not Require Plan Tailored To Student's Religious Needs

In M.L. ex rel Leiman v. Starr, (D MD, Aug. 3, 2015), a Maryland federal district court held that the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) does not require a public school system to take account of a student's religious and cultural needs in designing an individualized education program (IEP) for him. Under 20 USC 1412, federal assistance is available to states that make free appropriate public education available to all children with disabilities.  However, IDEA

does not require a local educational agency to pay for the cost of education ... of a child with a disability at a private school ... if that agency made a free appropriate public education available to the child and the parents elected to place the child in such private school....

In this case, the court rejected the claim by an Orthodox rabbi and his wife that a public school system did not make a free appropriate public education available to their Down syndrome son when his IEP was not geared to his religious and cultural identity as an Orthodox Jew.  According to the court, a student's program is to be individualized considering the student's cognitive and developmental capabilities and needs.  It does not need to be "specifically tailored to the religious and cultural enclave in which the student lives."

Egypt Will Close Down Restaurants That Prohibit Women From Wearing Hijabs

According to Egyptian Streets yesterday, Egypt’s Minister of Tourism Khaled Abbas Rami says he will close down any restaurants or tourism facilities that refuse service to women wearing hijabs (Muslim headscarves). Apparently a number of restaurants, bars and high-end resorts have barred veiled women.  Women have increasingly taken to social media to complain about the discrimination.

Sportscaster Sues Fox Sports Claiming Religious Discrimination

Yesterday former NFL player and sportscaster Craig James filed suit in a Texas state court against Fox Sports and various of its affiliates claiming religious discrimination in violation of the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act and breach of contract.  The complaint (redacted full text) in James v. Fox Sports, Inc., (TX Dist. Ct., filed 8/3/2015), claims that James' firing in September 2013, just days after he was hired by Fox, was "due to a short Christianity-focused statement" opposing same-sex marriage on Biblical grounds that he made during a political debate when he ran unsuccessfully for United States Senate some 18 months earlier. Liberty Institute has more information on the case along with links to depositions, the demand letter and media coverage.  According to The Wrap yesterday, Fox Sports issued a statement saying in part:

... Craig James is a polarizing figure in the college sports community and the decision not to use him in our college football coverage was based on the perception that he abused a previous on-air position to further a personal agenda.  The decision had nothing to do with Mr. James’ religious beliefs and we did not discriminate against Mr. James in any way.

James, in 2009 while at ESPN, was involved in a controversy stemming from his comments about the Texas Tech coach Mike Leach's treatment of James' son. (Background.) James resigned from ESPN in Dec. 2011 to run for the U.S. Senate. [This paragraph has been corrected. An earlier more cryptic version gave an incorrect impression.]

Orthodox Jewish Tenants Sue Over Electronic Keys In Building Renovations

The New York Daily News reports on a class action religious discrimination lawsuit filed in federal district court in New York last month by Orthodox Jewish tenants in LeFrak City, a 20-building housing complex in Queens.  The case is Ibragimov v. Lefrak Organization, Inc., (ED NY, filed 7/23/2015).  The Fair Housing Act suit claims that an electronic key system that has been installed in the renovations of the buildings creates Sabbath observance problems. The change means that  Orthodox Jews who will not create or break an electrical circuit on the Sabbath have to wait outside until someone else is entering the building. The lawsuit seeks to require installation of one door in each building that opens with a conventional key and also the installation of a chip that allows an elevator in each building to operate as a Sabbath elevator-- stopping automatically at every floor without riders needing to press buttons.

Court Refuses To Reduce Sentence of Rabbi Convicted of Voyeurism

According to the Washington Post, a D.C Superior Court judge on Friday denied a motion to reduce the six-and-one-half year prison sentence of Barry Freundel, former rabbi of Washington, D.C.'s Kesher Israel Synagogue who plead guilty in May to 52 counts of voyeurism. Freundel's attorneys argued that he should have been sentenced only for one act of videotaping women preparing to use a mikveh, instead of 45 days for each of the 52 incidents. (See prior related posting.)

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Armin Steinbach, Burqas and Bans: The Wearing of Religious Symbols Under the European Convention of Human Rights, (Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law, Volume 4, Issue 1, 2015).
• Kenneth Einar Himma, Why Religious Freedom Does Not Warrant Protection by a Special Right, ( Kenneth Einar Himma, Miodrag Jovanović, and Bojan Spaic (eds.), Fundamental Rights: Justification and Interpretation (The Hague: Eleven International Publishing) 2015, Forthcoming).
• Sarah Barringer Gordon, The African Supplement: Religion, Race, and Corporate Law in Early National America, (William & Mary Quarterly, Vol. 72, No. 3, Pg. 385, 2015).
• Howard M. Wasserman, Crazy in Alabama: Judicial Process and the Last Stand Against Marriage Equality in the Land of George Wallace, (Northwestern University Law Review Online, Vol. 110, p. 201, 2015).

From SmartCILP:

• J. Benjamin Hurlbut, Religion and Public Reason in the Politics of Biotechnology, 29 Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy 423-452 (2015).
• Symposium. The Scholarship and Teaching of Jack Sammons. Remarks by Timothy W. Floyd, Daisy Hurst Floyd, Harold S. Lewis, Jr. and Jack L. Sammons; articles by Gary J. Simson, Timothy W. Floyd, James Boyd White, Joseph Vining, Eugene Garver, Robert Audi, Richard Dawson, Linda H. Edwards, David T. Ritchie, Linda L. Berger, Mark L. Jones and Patrick Emery Longan. 66 Mercer Law Review 265-555 (2015).

IRS Commissioner Says No Non-Profit Revocations In His Term For Colleges That Oppose Gay Marriage

At a July 29 hearing conducted by the Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Oversight, Agency Action, Federal Rights and Federal Courts (video and testimony at hearing), Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) had a lengthy exchange with IRS Commissioner John Koskinen over whether the IRS would revoke the tax-exempt status of Christian colleges and universities that remain opposed to same-sex marriage.  According to the Christian Post, Koskinen pledged:

that he will commit to making sure that the IRS does not punish religious schools for not adopting policies to accommodate gay marriage — such as allowing married same-sex couples to live in married student housing — as long as he is in charge of the IRS..... However, Koskinen did leave the door wide open for tax-exempt statuses to be a problem for Christian schools in the future....

All we do is follow whatever the public policy is that is set by other organizations," Koskinen argued. "At this point other actions would have to take place before the IRS can consider issuing a regulation, which would give people notices to what we think the public policy was and then cases and exams would be conducted under that.

[Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Shaw v. Toole, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97667 (SD GA, July 27, 2015), a Georgia federal magistrate judge recommended that a Muslim inmate's complaint that he was denied a vegan diet be dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies before filing suit. UPDATE: The magistrate's recommendation was adopted by the court at 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111856 (Aug. 24, 2015).

In Sokolsky v. California, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97738 (ED CA, July 25, 2015), a California federal magistrate judge held that a Jewish civil detainee held as a sexually violent predator can proceed on his complaint against certain defendants regarding the lack of kosher food and religious discrimination if he files an amended complaint or notifies the court that he is willing to proceed on his cognizable claims. UPDATE: The court ordered the case to proceed on the cognizable claims at 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122292, Sept. 12, 2015.

In Pickering v. California Department of Corrections, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99137 (ED CA, July 28, 2015), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed, with leave to amend, an inmate's claim that the Astru/Odinic religious group was not treated equally with other religious groups.

In Berry v. Hershberger, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99327 (D MD, July 30, 2015), a Maryland federal district court dismissed a Muslim inmate's complaint that he was not permitted to participate in the Ramadan fast, and was denied access to religious articles, based on his status as a pretrial detainee.

In Washington v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation & Corrections, 2015 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 79 (OH Ct. Cl., July 14, 2015), the Ohio Court of Claims held that it does not have jurisdiction over an inmate's complaint that he was denied halal/ kosher food.

In Williams v. Delaware, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99927 (D DE, July 30, 2015), a Delaware federal district court dismissed plaintiff's complaint that while held for four days before posting bond-- a period during Ramadan-- he was not permitted to fast.

Russian Culture Ministry Takes Over Crimean Historic Religious Site

AP reports that Russia's President Vladimir Putin today placed an important archaeological site in the Crimea under control of the Russian Culture Ministry.  The site, the ancient city of Chersonesus, is near Sevastopol, the main port city in the Crimea which Russia annexed from Ukraine last year. Chersonesus is important as the place where the Kievan Rus ruler, Prince Vladimir, was baptized in 988 before bringing Christianity to the region.  Putin's move comes after the Governor of Sevastopol was widely criticized for his decision last month to appoint a Russian Orthodox priest as director of the Chersonesus museum.  The priest was seen as lacking the education and experience for the position, and Sevastopol's governor was mocked on Russian social media for his explanation that "religion has always dealt with science."

Report on Tax Implications of Same-Sex Marriage

On July 30, the Congressional Research Service issued a report titled The Federal Tax Treatment of Married Same-Sex Couples. The report details the various tax code provisions that will lead to tax differences between filing as two single taxpayers and filing as a married couple.  The report concluded that while for some same-sex couples, federal recognition of their marriage will lead to lower taxes, for other it will lead to taxes higher than if filing as two single individuals. Several studies have reached different estimates on the overall impact on tax revenues.

Sixth Cert. Petition On Contraceptive Coverage Accommodation For Religious Non-Profits Filed

Last week yet another petition for certiorari was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in a case challenging the government's accommodation for religious non-profits who object to the Affordable Care Act's required contraceptive coverage.  This is the sixth certiorari petition raising the issue that has been filed. (Becket Fund's tabulation of cases.)  This petition (full text) was in Southern Nazarene University v. Burwell.  In the case, the 10th Circuit (in an opinion covering appeals in three cases) upheld the accommodation, finding that it does not substantially burden the non-profits' religious exercise. (See prior posting.) [Thanks to Marty Lederman via Religionlaw for the lead.]

Sympathetic Court Nevertheless Rejects Claim That Chimpanzees Are "Persons" Entitled To Habeas Relief

A New York state trial court judge yesterday in a 33-page opinion sympathetic to plaintiffs' claims nevertheless rejected attempts by animal rights activists to obtain a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of two chimpanzees used in scientific studies at State University of New York at Stony Brook.  In Nonhuman Rights Project, Inc. v. Stanley, (NY Cty. Sup. Ct., July 30, 2015), after dealing with a number of procedural and jurisdictional issues, the court moved to the central question in the case: "whether a chimpanzee is a legal person entitled to bring  writ of habeas corpus." The court pointed out that "'legal personhood' is not necessarily synonymous with being human..."  Courts use the legal fiction of personhood to treat corporations as persons. However the court decided it was bound by appellate precedent to reject the claim of personhood here. The opinion concluded:

The similarities between chimpanzees and humans inspire the empathy felt for a beloved pet.  Efforts to extend legal rights to chimpanzees are thus understandable; some day they may even succeed.  Courts, however, are slow to embrace change, and occasionally seem reluctant to engage in broader, more inclusive interpretations of law, if only to the modest extent of affording them greater consideration.  As Justice Kennedy aptly observed in Lawrence v. Texas, albeit in a different context, "times can blind us to certain truths and later generations can see that laws once thought necessary and proper in fact serve only to oppress."... The pace may now be accelerating. (See Obergefell v. Hodges....)

In a press release on the decision, the Nonhuman Rights Project said it will promptly appeal the decision to the Appellate Division.  New York Times reports on the decision.

Judge Acquits Hasidic Rabbi Accused of Sexually Molesting A Boy

In Rockland County, New York yesterday, a state trial court judge, after a bench trial, found Hasidic Rabbi Moshe Taubenfeld not guilty on charges of sexually abusing a minor from 2001 to 2006.  The Lower Hudson Journal News reports that the young man accusing Taubenfeld said that the abuse began when he was 8 years old and contnued until he moved out of the village of New Square at age 13,  The judge said there was reasonable doubt after hearing the evidence in the multi-week trial. But supporters of the boy charge that Judge Rolf Thorsen's decision was political because he owes his recent election to the judiciary to the New Square Hasidic community.  The defendant, father of 20, is well respected tutor and marriage counselor in the New Square community; his wife and a young daughter were killed in a terrorist attack on a bus in Israel.

Inspector General Issues Report On Protection of Conscience Rights In the Military

Last week (July 22), the U.S. Department of Defense Inspector General issued a report on Rights of Conscience Protections for Armed Forces Service Members and Their Chaplains.  The 2014 Defense Authorization Act called for the report, which was to focus on the extent to which the Armed Forces are complying with regulations designed to protect the conscience, moral principles and religious beliefs of members of the military and military chaplains.  In a posting earlier this week, God and Country Blog is critical of the report for looking too narrowly at issues regarding negative consequences short of formal reprimands flowing from religious expression.

Religious Order Sued By Two Victims For Sex Abuse From 35 Years Ago

As reported in a press release on Tuesday from Jeff Anderson & Associates, two new clergy abuse lawsuits were filed this week in state court in Minnesota:

Civil lawsuits were filed today by two men who were sexually abused as minors by clergy at Crosier Seminary in Onamia, Minn. Doe 51 and Doe 56 were molested by multiple priests and brothers of the Canons Regular of the Order of the Holy Cross (“Crosier”) religious order. Several of the clergy named in the complaints also interacted with and sexually abused children throughout Minnesota, including at parishes and schools in the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis, and the Diocese of St. Cloud.

Doe 51 was sexually abused from approximately 1979-81 by Father Gerald Funcheon, Brother Gabriel Guerrero and Brother Roman Fleischhacker, when Doe 51 was approximately 15-17 years old. Doe 56 was sexually abused in approximately 1979-80 by Funcheon, Brother Wendell Mohs and Father Roger Vaughn, when Doe 56 was approximately 14-15 years old. The perpetrators were assigned to Crosier Seminary at the time they abused Doe 51 and Doe 56, who attended the seminary.

The complaint (full text) in Doe 56 v. Canons Regular of the Order of the Holy Cross and (full text) in Doe 51 v. Canons Regular of the Order of the Holy Cross, (MN Dist. Ct., filed 7/28/2015) charge defendant religious order with negligence, negligent supervision and negligent retention of the offending clergy. The Minnesota Child Victim Act enacted in 2013 extended the statute of limitations in child sex abuse cases, including creating a retroactive 3-year window for victims whose claims were previously barred.

Pennsylvania Court Retroactively Validates Same-Sex Marriage After Death of One Spouse

In what is apparently the first case of its kind, on Wednesday a Bucks County, Pennsylvania trial court retroactively validated a same-sex common law marriage.  As reported by the Doylestown Intelligencer, the decision allows the widowed Dr. Sabrina Maurer to recover spousal survivor benefits under two separate insurance policies, and allows her an inheritance tax refund.  Maurer and Dr. Kimberly Underwood were married in a 2001 Episcopal religious ceremony, even though same-sex marriages were not then recognized in Pennsylvania.  However common law marriages were recognized if they took place before 2005. Underwood died in 2013.  Same-sex marriages became legal in Pennsylvania in 2014.

Consent Decree Bars Religious Activities By Colorado School District

Denver 7 News reports that a consent decree (full text) was filed this week in Basevitz v. Fremont RE-2 School District, (D CO, July 28, 2015).  The lawsuit, filed in May by a high school teacher in the district, claimed that Florence, Colorado High School extensively promotes evangelical Christian activities through arrangements with a church, The Cowboy Church at Crossroads. (See prior posting.)  Under the settlement, school district employees may not in their official capacities engage in religious activities with students; and the district will ban all school-sponsored prayers or other religious expression before school-related captive audiences. Also the school district will ban school sponsorship of religious groups and religious activities, distribution of religious literature by district employees, and school-sponsored prayer request boxes.