Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Ladner v. Hull, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118269 (ED VA, Sept. 3, 2015), a Virginia federal district court dismissed a Born-Again Christian inmate's complaint that there were not church services or Bible study sessions available to him. It found that a faith representative was available, and that plaintiff could file requests for other religious needs.

In Cooper v. Sowers, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118181 (D MD, Sept. 4, 2015), a Maryland federal district court dismissed a Catholic inmate's complaint that he was not provided a meatless diet on Ash Wednesday and on Fridays during Lent. Prison policy provides no special meal adjustments for those days and leaves it up to each inmate to decide what food to abstain from.

In Mootry v. Flores, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118632 (ED CA, Sept. 4, 2015), a California federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing a Muslim inmate's complaint that he was denied Jumu'ah prayer services because of a policy barring inmate ministers from leading inmate religious services without a supervising chaplain or volunteer.

In Sherman v. Jess, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119282 (ED WI, Sept. 8, 2015), a Wisconsin federal district court dismissed a complaint by a Pagan Wiccan inmate that he did not get his religious text, Book of Shadows, while in temporary lockup.

In Mitchell v. Cate, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120059 (ED CA, Sept. 8, 2015), a California federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing a Christian inmate's complaint that he was not allowed to participate in religious activities or speak to a religious adviser during the time he was subject to a restricted modified program.

In Applegate v. Kokor, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120107 (ED CA, Sept. 8, 2015), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed with leave to amend a 252-page complaint alleging "various religious claims against eight Defendants," saying "it is neither time-efficient nor fair to other litigants for the Court to hunt through Plaintiff's Complaint for camouflaged cognizable claims."

In Robinson v. Cate, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120870 (ED CA, Sept. 9, 2015), a California federal magistrate judge recommended that a Muslim inmate be permitted to move ahead with free exercise and equal protection claims for injunctive relief on his complaint that the Religious Meat Alternate Program fails to provide a fully Halal diet that is comparable to the fully Kosher diet provided to Jewish inmates.

In Moon v. Unterreiner, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121171 (ED MO, Sept. 11, 2015), a Missouri federal district court dismissed on various procedural grounds a suit by an inmate held under home confinement with electronic monitoring who claimed that his free exercise rights are infringed by requiring him to state the times he is going to and leaving his mosque for prayer.

Australian Court Awards Damages For Sexual Abuse By Headmistress of Jewish School

In Erlich v. Leifer, (SC Victoria, Sept. 16, 2015), a trial court in the Australian state of Victoria awarded compensatory and exemplary damages to Hadassa Sara Erlich who as a student in an ultra-Orthodox school was sexually abused by the school headmistress Malka Leifer,  The court found that the school directly and vicariously liable for the psychological injuries to Erlich. In an 82-page opinion, the court described Leifer's unusual position of power over students.  The Melbourne Herald Sun reports on the decision.

EEOC Sues Health Care System For Denying Religious Accommodation

The EEOC announced that it filed suit yesterday against the Minnesota-based North Memorial Health Care for withdrawing a job offer to a Seventh Day Adventist nurse after she requested an accommodation for religious practices.The federal court lawsuit seeks damages for nurse Emily Sure-Ondara, as well as an injunction barring retaliation against employees or job applicants who request religious accommodations.

Denial of Use Permit Did Not Violate RLUIPA

In Livingston Christian Schools v. Genoa Charter Township, (ED MI, Sept. 15, 2015), a Michigan federal district court denied a temporary restraining order to a Christian school that wants to move to property owned by the Brighton Church of the Nazarene.  The township board denied the Church's application to amend its special use permit to allow the school to operate on the property because of objections from neighbors about traffic and non-compliance with the current special use permit. The school claims this violate its rights under RLUIPA.  The court held that the school had not shown a likelihood of success on that claim:

LCS cannot meet its burden in establishing that the denial has more than a minimal impact on its free exercise of religion. The township’s denial of the church’s special use permit does not preclude either the church ... or LCS from freely exercising their religious tenets. The church is free to continue its normal operations pursuant to its existing special use permit. Similarly, LCS is free to continue operating as a religious school, and it has a building in Pinckney that it owns and has been using as the location for its school for the past nine years. Moreover, LCS recently found a second location from which it can operate. The fact that LCS has “ready alternatives” more than sufficient to meet its religious needs despite the township’s denial makes it unlikely that it has suffered a substantial burden on its free exercise of religion.

Abuse Victims Will Press Pope For More Accountability

In an article posted yesterday, the New York Times reports that when Pope Francis visits the United States later this month, survivors of clergy sexual abuse will be pressing him to do more to deal with abusers:

Advocates and victims say that while the church has improved in preventing abuse, it is still resisting full accountability. It blocks efforts to overhaul statute of limitations laws that protect many priests from prosecution and the church from lawsuits that could lead to more payouts to victims, they say. Outside the United States, the church still does not require those who face accusations of abuse to be removed from active ministry. And the Vatican has never explicitly punished a bishop for shielding accused priests, instead quietly accepting a few resignations....

He could also direct archdioceses to release the names of credibly accused American priests, at least 2,400 of whom have never been identified, said Terence McKiernan, the president of BishopAccountability.org,

Canadian Appeals Court Invalidates Niqab Ban At Citizenship Ceremonies

In Canada yesterday the Federal Court of Appeal in a rapid ruling from the bench following a half-day hearing held that the government's guideline banning the wearing of the niqab when taking the citizenship oath at naturalization ceremonies is invalid. According to the National Post, the judges moved quickly so that Zunera Ishaq could obtain her citizenship in time to vote in the October 19 federal election. The appeals court affirmed a lower court's ruling (see prior posting) that the policy against face coverings violates the government's own citizenship regulations. At the appeals court hearing, a Justice Department lawyer conceded that the face covering policy is not mandatory because a mandatory policy cannot be imposed through a mere guideline.

Arizona City Adopts Christian-Only Invocation Policy

At its September 14 meeting, the Coolidge, Arizona City Council had before it a resolution (full text) to open each Council meeting with a prayer.  The resolution was drafted to comply with the Supreme Court's Town of Greece guidelines.  However, according to the Coolidge Examiner, in passing the resolution, Council by a 4-2 vote also adopted an amendment offered by Councilman Rob Hudelson to limit invocations to Christian prayers.  The paper reports:

Speaking last was Hudelson, who himself is a preacher. He made clear his views that the United States is a Christian nation.

“I think it’s very important,” Hudelson said. “We just proclaimed Constitution Week. You know what was said at the end of the [Revolutionary] war? A treaty in Paris that said ‘In the name of the most holy and undivided trinity.’ You don’t get that from the Quran. You get it from the Bible. You get it from Christianity. That’s our heritage.”

After this, Hudelson motioned to accept the resolution with the stipulation that this be a Christian item

The City Attorney told Council that this amendment would violate the Establishment Clause, but nevertheless Council passed it.  The Resolution is subject to a 30-day review period, and the City Attorney will now rewrite it to comply with Council's amendment.

Challenge To Kaporos Ritual Fails

According to the New York Post, on Monday a New York state trial court judge ruled against activists challenging the Jewish pre-Yom Kippur ritual of kaporos, which involves use of a live chicken in a ceremony to symbolically atone for the past year's sins.  The chicken is then slaughtered and donated to the needy.  The lawsuit (see prior posting) claimed the practice violates various health and animal cruelty laws.  The court found that challengers had not shown that the ritual was a public nuisance, avoiding the need to rule on defendants' free exercise defenses.

Woman Sues NYPD Over Required Removal of Hijab For Mug Shot

Courthouse News Service and the New York Daily News report on a suit filed Monday in federal court in the Eastern District of New York against the New York Police Department by a Muslim woman forced to remove her hijab (head scarf)  before having her mug shot taken. Mervat Soliman, a 53-year old Egyptian woman,was arrested after a fight with her neighbor over a parking space. Alleging various disrespectful incidents during questioning, when Soliman objected to removing her hijab, police allegedly said: "This is America, we don't care."

Update on Kim Davis and Marriage Licenses In Kentucky

On Monday, Rowan County, Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis, after spending 5 days in jail on contempt charges, returned to work still opposed on religious grounds to issuing marriage licences to same-sex couples.  However, as reported by CNN, she did not prevent her deputy clerks from issuing licences reading that they were issued "pursuant to federal court order." Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear said that the state will recognize these licenses as valid.  Meanwhile, yesterday in Davis v. Beshear, (6th Cir., Sept. 15, 2015), the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals denied Davis request for a preliminary injunction against the Governor and the Commissioner of the Kentucky Department of Libraries and Archives seeking to prevent them from enforcing the district court order that county clerks issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples and exempting her from issuing licenses pending appeal of the district court's delay in passing on her request for an injunction. (See prior related posting.) The court said in part:

Davis maintains that the issuance of marriage licenses to same-sex couples burdens her sincerely held religious beliefs in violation of the U.S. Constitution, the Kentucky Constitution, and the Kentucky Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Davis has not demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success on her federal constitutional claims. We need not address the merits of her claims under Kentucky law because the Eleventh Amendment of the U.S. Constitution precludes the federal courts from compelling state officials to comply with state law.

Crane Collapse Kills 107 At Mecca's Grand Mosque As Hajj Approaches

According to CNN, yesterday in Mecca, ten days before the beginning of the Hajj, a powerful storm caused a construction crane to collapse through the roof of the Grand Mosque, killing 107 and injuring 238 others. The Mosque surrounds the Kaaba, the holiest site in Islam.  The Mosque is being expanded to better handle the large number of visitors that make the Hajj pilgrimage each year.

Court Issues Interim $43.7M Judgment Against Russia In Fight Over Return of Jewish Library

In Agadus Chasidei Chabad of United States v. Russian Federation, (D DC,Sept. 10, 2015), the D.C. federal district court entered an interim judgment for accrued sanctions totaling $43.7 million against the Russian Federation, the Russian Ministry of Culture and Mass Communication, and the Russian State Military Archive.  It went on to hold that plaintiffs may petition the clerk every 90 days for an additional judgment until defendants comply with a 2010 order of the court.

The sanctions grow out of a ten-year effort by Chabad to regain possession of two expropriated collections of religious books held by the Russian government. After losing its jurisdictional arguments, the Russian government refused to participate in the litigation and in 2010 a default judgment was entered against it. The court then imposed civil sanctions of $50,000 per day until defendants comply with the court's order. (See prior posting.)  The United States government argued against the court granting the current interim judgment, claiming that this will further damage U.S. foreign policy interests including efforts to reach a settlement with defendants on plaintiffs' behalf. The court disagreed saying generally:

Given the United States' current sanctions against Russia and Russian interests based upon various geopolitical events, the Court is unpersuaded by such a vague concern in this case.

The court also pointed out that this is not an enforcement action. Enforcement issues will arise only when plaintiff identifies property in the United States to attach.

Reporting on the decision, the Legal Times quotes plaintiffs' lawyer who says this decision will permit plaintiffs to register a judgment in other states and look for assets to attach. He said Chabad will not go after Russian art or cultural objects on loan to U.S. museums. Meanwhile, as previously reported, in a split with Chabad in the U.S., the Russian branch of Chabad supports the Russian government's compromise arrangement which involves digitizing one of the collections and moving it to Moscow's new Jewish Museum and Tolerance Center.

Counter-Letter Urges Obama To Retain 2007 Office of Legal Counsel Interpretation of RFRA

As previously reported, last month a coalition of 130 religious, civil rights and advocacy organizations sent a letter to the President urging that the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel reconsider a 2007 Memorandum that interpreted RFRA to require exemptions for religiously-affiliated organizations from non-discrimination provisions in federal grant programs. Now a counter-letter dated Sept. 10 and signed by 70 religious leaders and faculty at religiously-affiliated colleges (full text) has been sent to the President urging him to retain "basic principles and provisions of federal law that support religious staffing by religious organizations." The letter reads in part:

We are grateful that you have welcomed “all hands” to contribute to federal social policy by maintaining and refining the federal faith-based initiative and its rules that provide for equal opportunity for faith-based organizations to collaborate with government in serving community needs. Making it more difficult for faith-based organizations to join those partnerships would undermine, rather than burnish, your commitment to effective and flourishing “all hands” partnerships.

Mirror of Justice reports on the letter.

Obama Holds Conference Call With U.S. Rabbis In Advance of Rosh Hashanah

A White House press release reports that yesterday President Obama held a conference call with over 500 U.S. rabbis from the four major Jewish religious denominations to mark Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year, which begins at sundown on Sunday. According to the readout of the President's call:

In addition to wishing the Rabbis and their congregations a happy, healthy new year, the President discussed and answered participants' questions on a range of topics, including the nuclear deal among the P5+1, the EU, and Iran that will verifiably prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. 

Second Suit Filed Challenging Nevada's School Voucher Law

This week a second state court lawsuit challenging Nevada's broad school voucher program was filed. The complaint (full text) in Lopez v. Schwartz, (NV Dist. Ct., filed 9/10/2015), claims that the challenged statute violates the Education Article (Art. XI) of the Nevada Constitution. The suit alleges that the new law diverts funds appropriated for uniform public schools to non-uniform private ones,  A press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit said that it complements the one filed last month by the ACLU (see prior posting) by raising a separate and independent basis for invalidating the law.

New York City Repeals Circumcision Informed Consent Rule

As reported by the New York Times, on Wednesday the New York City Board of Health by a vote of 9-1-1 repealed its largely unenforced regulations that required parental consent forms be signed in cases of ritual circumcision using the direct oral suction technique (metzitzah b'peh). The original regulations were adopted in 2012 in order to prevent passage of the herpes simplex virus to infants. (See prior posting.)  In its Notice of Adoption the Board said in part:

In February, 2015, the Mayor announced a new strategy to address this problem. As part of this approach, the Department will work cooperatively with leaders of the Orthodox Jewish community to educate parents about the risks of DOS. These educational efforts will include working with hospitals throughout the City to distribute educational materials about the risks of DOS to the parents of all newborn infant boys, as well as making this information available at other health care settings, such as obstetric and pediatric practices. These materials, which include a Department telephone number for parents who may have questions, have been translated into Yiddish and are being distributed at hospitals and medical offices that service communities where DOS is practiced. The Department’s educational initiative is more likely to succeed if the Department can restore a strong relationship with these communities.

City officials expect Orthodox Jewish leaders to cooperate in banning mohels  who are found to have infected an infant, though formal arrangements with them are not yet complete. (See prior related posting.) [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Guilty Pleas In Indictment For Exporting Meat Falsely Labeled As Halal

According to the Des Moines Register, yesterday Midamar Corp. and Islamic Services of America each pleaded guilty in federal court in Iowa to one count of conspiracy to make false statements on export certificates, sell misbranded meat and commit wire fraud in the export to Malaysia and Indonesia of beef products purporting to be Halal. Each company will forfeit $600,000 in profits and may face probation and additional fines at sentencing. The related companies and their principals were indicted last year. (See prior posting.) Midamar’s founder, Bill Aossey Jr., was convicted earlier this summer of falsifying documents, while Aossey’s two sons who are directors of Midamar will enter guilty pleas on Friday. (See prior related posting.)

Oregon Judge Faces Ethics Charges Over Refusing Same-Sex Weddings and Other Matters

The Oregon Commission on Judicial Fitness and Disability announced in a press release issued Tuesday that a hearing is scheduled next month on ethics charges filed against Marion County Judge Vance Day.  (See prior related posting.) Day has religious objections to same-sex marriage, and one of the charges against him is that before he decided to discontinue entirely performing wedding ceremonies, he had his staff screen wedding applicants to assure that he was not presiding over a same-sex marriage.  However Day, who is head of the Veterans Treatment Court, also faces five other unrelated charges including false statements, improperly allowing a veteran with a prior felony conviction to handle firearms and posting a picture of Adolph Hitler in the county courthouse.  According to CBS News, the Hitler portrait was part of a collage included in memorabilia of a local doctor who had served in World War II. The portrait was surrounded and partially obscured by pages from the doctor's diary, medals and photos.

Meanwhile, The Oregonian reported yesterday that another Oregon state trial court judge, Washington County Judge Thomas Kohl, has also stopped performing weddings now that same-sex marriages are legal.  Kohl has written and speaks widely in churches and prisons about the transformative power of faith.

Fayetteville Voters Approve Controversial Anti-Discrimination Law

In Fayetteville, Arkansas on Tuesday voters approved the city's controversial Uniform Civil Rights Protection Ordinance.  According to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, complete unofficial returns show 7,666 votes for and 6,860 against the Ordinance that bars discrimination in employment, public accommodations, real estate, contracts and voting on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. Opponents, many of whom object that the religious exemptions in the ordinance are too narrow, have filed suit challenging the legality of the Ordinance. They claim it violates free exercise and free speech rights as well as Arkansas' recently enacted Intrastate Commerce Improvement Act that prohibits counties, municipalities and other political subdivisions from expanding civil rights protections beyond those found in state law. (See prior posting.)

Suit Challenges Kapparot Ceremonies Under California's Unfair Competition Law

In Los Angeles a group of animal rights activists have filed a state court lawsuit seeking to stop public kapparot ceremonies.  The Jewish Journal reports on the lawsuit, filed August 26,  challenging the pre-Yom Kippur ceremony which uses live chickens that are subsequently slaughtered.  Apparently, at least in previous years, in the Pico-Robertson neighborhood kapparot has been promoted with booths set up in parking lots, large banners and barkers in chicken costumes. Some say that the anti-kapparot protests in the Pico-Robertson area of Los Angeles have now driven the practice underground.

The lawsuit contends that the practice violates California's Unfair Competition Law (Bus. & Prof. Code Sec. 17200- 17210). The law's definition of unfair competition includes "any unlawful ... business act or practice."  A suit for an injunction and damages may be brought by "a person who has suffered injury in fact and has lost money or property as a result of the unfair competition."  The complaint, filed on behalf of seven plaintiffs, claims that in transporting, storing, and slaughtering the chickens, and later disposing of their blood and fecal matter, the six synagogues and five individuals named as defendants violate an average of eleven laws. Plaintiffs claim interesting losses to give them standing: expenses for travel to kapparot protests, time lost from work as a result of attending the protests and the cost of printing leaflets. One plaintiff claimed veterinarian bills for two chickens she rescued from one of the synagogues named as a defendant.

Suit Challenging Teaching of Evolution Dismissed

In Smith v. Jefferson County Board of Education, (D WV, Aug. 25, 2015), a West Virginia federal district court dismissed a suit, filed pro se by a historically litigious plaintiff, seeking to have the court outlaw the teaching of evolution in public schools. The complaint filed by plaintiff, a parent and taxpayer, is described by the court:

The three page complaint alleges that the Defendants have “fostered the propagation of religious faith” in West Virginia public schools, by way of “denying the Plaintiff’s accurate scientific mathematical system of genetic variations that proves evolution is a religion.”

National Center for Science Education reports on the decision.

Clergy-Penitent Privilege Does Not Shield Disclosure of Writer of Defamatory Letter

In Jaime Doe v. Catholic Diocese of Rockford, (IL App., Sept. 4, 2015), plaintiff sued seeking the identity of the writer of an allegedly defamatory letter about her son.  The letter, sent to the pastor of the parish, alleged that plaintiff's son engaged in the sexual touching of another minor child.  The appeals court affirmed the trial court's order that the writer of the letter be disclosed.  In doing so, the court concluded that the letter is not covered by the Clergy-Penitent Privilege, saying in part:

The writer was a volunteer for a religious-education program conducted by the parish and had the responsibility of monitoring the children in the program. In our view, at least on the present record, the statements in issue are simply not of the character of a confession or admission for which the writer was seeking spiritual guidance. Rather, they are outlining a potential source of risk for the parish and the children if J. Doe were to repeat such conduct while participating in the educational program offered by the parish. This is fundamentally not a matter of conscience for the writer; rather it is a matter of risk management for the writer as an agent of the parish and a guardian of children. Accordingly, we hold that the clergy-penitent privilege is simply inapplicable.

Medical Examiner Need Not Wait To See If Religious Objection To Autopsy Is Made

In Rugova v. City of New York, (NY App. Div., Sept. 8, 2015), a New York intermediate appellate court held that the trier of fact should determine whether the Medical Examiner's 36-hour delay in informing next of kin that an accident victim's body was available amounted to interference with a family's burial rights (right of sepulcher). However the court held that the Medical Examiner was not liable for conducting an autopsy after the accident even though that was inconsistent with the family's Muslim religious beliefs. The court said in part:

As a matter of statute, the Medical Examiner has extensive authority to perform autopsies within the exercise of professional discretion ... including where, as here, circumstances indicate that the death was accidental....  

Pursuant to statute, compelling public necessity is only required where the Medical Examiner has received an objection on religious grounds from a surviving friend or relative or has reason to believe that an autopsy is contrary to the decedent's religious beliefs.... While plaintiffs obviously could not make such objection, since they had not been informed of decedent's death, it is submitted that the Medical Examiner's office was not obligated to wait and see if an objection would be made before performing the autopsy....

District Judge Lifts Contempt Sanction and Orders Kentucky Clerk Released From Jail

Today as Republican Presidential candidates Mike Huckabee and Ted Cruz prepared to visit Rowan County (KY) Clerk Kim Davis (CNN), federal district judge David Bunning ordered her released from jail.  His order (full text) read in part:

On September 8, 2015, Plaintiffs filed a Status Report at the Court’s behest.  According to the Report, Plaintiffs have obtained marriage licenses from the Rowan CountyClerk’s Office. The Court is therefore satisfied that the Rowan County Clerk’s Office is fulfilling its obligation to issue marriage licenses to all legally eligible couples, consistent with the U.S. Supreme Court’s holding in Obergefell  and this Court’s August 12, 2015 Order. For these reasons, the Court’s prior contempt sanction against Defendant Davis is hereby lifted. 

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED as follows:

1.Defendant Davis shall be  released  from the custody of the U.S. Marshal forthwith. Defendant Davis shall not interfere in any way, directly or indirectly, with the efforts of her deputy clerks to issue marriage licenses to all legally eligible couples. If Defendant Davis should interfere in any way with their issuance, that will be considered a violation of this Order and appropriate sanctions will be considered....

In a footnote to his order, Judge Bunning said:

While the Status Report reflects that Plaintiffs’ marriage licenses have been altered so that “Rowan County” rather than “Kim Davis” appears on the line reserved for the name of the county clerk, Plaintiffs have not alleged that the alterations affect the validity of the licenses. Nor do the alterations impact the Court’s finding that the deputy clerks have complied with the Court’s Order.

Washington Post reports on the court's action.

UPDATE: As Kim Davis was released from jail on Tuesday afternoon, Republican presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee, standing beside her, told the media: "If somebody needs to go to jail, I am willing to go in her place, and I mean that,"(The Hill).

Satanic Temple Asks To Place Baphomet On Arkansas Capitol Grounds

In a press release today, The Satanic Temple announced that it has formally asked the Arkansas’ Capitol Arts and Grounds Commission for permission to place its "Baphomet" monument on the Capitol grounds next to an already-authorized Ten Commandments monument.  The Satanic Temple contends that when Arkansas earlier this year enacted SB 939 authorizing the Ten Commandments monument, it effectively opened the Capitol grounds to private donations and may not engage in viewpoint discrimination in accepting them.It says it will place an inscription on the Baphomet monument reading:

Be it known to all that this statue commemorates the history of law in the United States of America. From the deplorable Satanic Witch Hunts, the cherished doctrines of due process, presumption of innocence and the protection of minorities from the tyranny of mob rule became part of the established foundation of American jurisprudence.

Baphomet was unveiled in a ceremony in Detroit earlier this summer. (See prior posting.) A Hindu group also wants to place a monument on the Arkansas Capitol grounds. (See prior posting.)

Pope Francis Reforms Church's Annulment Process

As reported by CNN and Vatican Radio, Pope Francis today issued two Apostolic  Letters motu proprio (by the Pope's own initiative) introducing major changes in the Church procedures for annulling marriages. One of the letters, Mitis Iudex Dominus Iesus (full text in Latin and Italian) reforms the Code of Canon Law of the Latin Church, while the other, Mitis et misericors Iesus (full text in Latin and Italian) reforms the Code of Canon Law for Oriental Churches. According to CNN, the documents make three major changes in the annulment process:  (1) they eliminate a second review by a cleric before a marriage can be nullified; (2) they give bishops the ability to fast-track and grant the annulments themselves in certain circumstances, for example when spousal abuse or an extramarital affair has occurred; and (3) they provide that the annulment process should be free, except for a nominal fee for administrative costs, and should be completed within 45 days.

Saga of Recalcitrant Rowan County Clerk Continues

Developments over the Labor Day weekend have made same-sex marriage opponent Kim Davis-- the Rowan County, Kentucky Clerk who was remanded to jail on civil contempt charges Thursday for refusing to allow her office to issue marriage licenses-- into a high profile symbol of conservative Christian resistance to the U.S. Supreme Court's same-sex marriage decision. (On details of her jailing, see prior posting.)  As reported by the Washington Post, on Friday morning, Deputy Clerk Brian Mason began issuing marriage licenses without Davis' name appearing on them. The County Attorney had ruled that deputy clerks do not need Davis' approval to issue licenses.  However Davis' attorneys argue that these licenses are void.   Marty Lederman at Balkinization blog on Saturday posted a detailed analysis of Kentucky law on this and related issues.

Meanwhile Davis' attorneys have filed motions seeking to get Davis released from jail. Before Davis was held in contempt, she had already filed an appeal with the 6th Circuit seeking to overturn the preliminary injunction that had been issued ordering her to end her resistance. (See prior posting). On Sunday, her attorneys filed an amended notice of appeal (full text), appealing the contempt citation against her as well as the district court's order clarifying that its injunction required issuance of licenses to all qualified couples, not just the plaintiffs in the lawsuit. A Liberty Counsel press release announcing the filing said in part:

“While most Americans are enjoying the extended holiday weekend with family and friends, Kim Davis sits in isolation for the fourth day in jail,” said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel. “We are working through the holiday to secure Kim’s freedom”....

In a subsequent press release on Monday announcing a press conference and rally for this afternoon, Davis' attorneys said:

Kim Davis has never sought the spotlight. Although some people have said she is a hero and some accuse her of wanting to be a martyr, neither is true. Kim bristles at the thought. She loves God, loves people, and loves her job. She remains faithful to all three and that is why she is here in jail. She may be a prisoner because of her faith, but Kim is freer than most Americans.

Yesterday, Davis' attorneys also filed a separate emergency motion for an injunction (full text) asking the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals to bar enforcement against her of Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear's memo ordering Clerks to comply with the Supreme Court's same-sex marriage decision, and asking that the court exempt her from being required to authorized same-sex marriages. Marty Lederman has extensive analysis of this motion as well.

Mic reports that conservative politicians are drawing analogies to the civil rights movement.  Iowa Congressman Steve King said that Davis should be considered for the Rosa Parks award, and Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee compared the Supreme Court's same-sex marriage decision to the Dred Scott decision.

Catholic Bishops Issue Labor Day Statement

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops this weekend issued its annual Labor Day Statement, saying in part:

The continuing struggles of most families to make ends meet are on display before our eyes, both at home and abroad. This Labor Day, we have a tremendous opportunity to reflect on how dignified work with a living wage is critical to helping our families and our greater society thrive....

This Labor Day, the violation of human dignity is evident in exploited workers, trafficked women and children, and a broken immigration system that fails people and families desperate for decent work and a better life. How do we participate in this wounding of human dignity, through choices about the clothes we wear, food we eat, and things we buy--most of which is unaffordable to the very workers who make it? .... These are difficult questions to ask, yet we must ask them. 

This year's statement gives particular attention to Pope Francis' recent encyclical, Laudato Si’ (see prior posting).  The USCCB website also makes available extensive legislative advocacy statements and background materials on labor and employment.

Catholic Diocese Can Move To Trial In 20-Year Battle To Create A Cemetery

Last week, a New York federal district court came down with another decision in the battle-- waged since 1994-- by the Catholic Diocese of Rockville Centre, New York to develop the Queen of Peace Cemetery in the Long Island village of Old Westbury.  The cemetery, which would be on a vacant 97-acre parcel that was once a horse farm, has already been the subject of extensive state court litigation. At issue in this lawsuit are restrictions imposed by the Village under its Places of Worship (POW) zoning law.  In Roman Catholic Diocese of Rockville Centre, New York v. Incorporated Village of  Old Westbury, (ED NY, Sept. 3, 2015), the court rejected a facial constitutional challenge to the POW law as well as a RLUIPA equal terms claim.  A 2011 federal court decision rejected various other federal and state claims. (See prior posting.), However last week's decision allowed the Diocese to proceed to trial on a RLUIPA substantial burden claim, an as-applied constitutional challenge to the POW law, a First Amendment Free Exercise claim, a retaliation claim and a claim for unlawful search of the cemetery site by a village official. New York Law Journal today has more background on the case.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Antony Barone Kolenc, Not 'For God and Country': Atheist Military Chaplains and the Free Exercise Clause, (48 U.S.F. L. Rev. 395 (2014)).
• James M. Oleske, Doric Columns Are Not Falling: Wedding Cakes, the Ministerial Exception, and the Public-Private Distinction, (Maryland Law Review, Vol. 75, 2015, Forthcoming).
• Erwin Chemerinsky & Michele Goodwin, Religion Is Not a Basis for Harming Others, (Georgetown Law Journal, 2015/16, Forthcoming).
• Chad G. Marzen & William Woodyard, Catholic Social Teaching, the Right to Immigrate, and the Right to Regulate Borders: A Proposed Solution for Comprehensive Immigration Reform Based Upon Catholic Social Principles, (September 3, 2015).
• Steven J. Heyman, A Struggle for Recognition: the Controversy Over Religious Liberty, Civil Rights, and Same-Sex Marriage, (First Amendment Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Robert A. Kahn, Rethinking the Context of Hate Speech (Book Review: Michael Herz & Peter Molnar, The Content and Context of Hate Speech: Regulation and Responses), (First Amendment Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Isam M. Shihada,The Backlash of 9/11 on Muslims in Mohsin Hamid's The Reluctant Fundamentalist, (International Journal of Humanities and Cultural Studies, Vol. 2, Issue 2 (2015)).
• Angela Riley & Kristen A. Carpenter, Owning Red: A Theory of Indian (Cultural) Appropriation, (Forthcoming Texas Law Review (2016)).

From SSRN (Non-U.S. law):

• Paul Andrew Gwaza & Yusuph Moses Garba, Promoting Ethnic and Religious Harmony in Nigeria through Fidelity to Human Rights Principles, (August 30, 2015).
• Bernard M. Levinson, 'Better that You Should Not Vow than that You Vow and Not Fulfill': Qoheleth's Use of Textual Allusion and the Transformation of Deuteronomy's Law of Vows, (in Reading Ecclesiastes Intertextually. Edited by Katharine Dell and Will Kynes. Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 587. London: T&T Clark, Pages 28–41, 2014).
• Patrick McKinley Brennan, An Essay on Christian Constitutionalism: Building in the Divine Style, for the Common Good(s), (Rutgers Journal of Law and Religion, Forthcoming).
• Aleksandra Lis & and Tomasz Pietrzykowski, Animals as Objects of Ritual Slaughter: Polish Law after the Battle Over Exceptionless Mandatory Stunning,(August 29, 2015).
• Peter Oliver, Companies and Their Fundamental Rights: A Comparative Perspective, (64 International and Comparative Law Quarterly, pp 661-696, 2015).

From SmartCILP:

• Symposium: From the Magna Carta to the Montgomery March: The Career of Rights in the Anglo-American Legal Tradition. Articles by Winston P. Nagan, Bradley W. Miller, James R. Stoner, Jr., Adam J. MacLeod, Dwight G. Duncan, David VanDrunen and Michael J. DeBoer. 6 Faulkner Law Review 1-196 (2014).
• Symposium: Pursuit of Happiness in Interreligious Perspective. Articles by His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama, Matthieu Ricard, Ch-Rab Jonathan Sacks, Michael J. Broyde, The Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori, Luke Timothy Johnson, Seyyed Hossein Nasr and Khaled Abou El Fadl; response by Vincent J. Cornell. 29 Journal of Law & Religion 5-123 (2014).

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Brinkman v. Linderman, (9th Cir., Sept. 3, 2015), the 9th Circuit affirmed an Arizona district court's dismissal of complaints by an inmate that he was denied a private worship area and ceremonial foods and was not allowed to use an open flame during certain religious ceremonies.

In Atkins v. Maryland Division of Correction, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114932, (D MD, Aug. 24, 2015), a Maryland federal district court permitted an inmate to proceed with his RLUIPA claim for declaratory relief and his free exercise claim against the chaplain for denying him kosher meals for 29 months.

In Twigg v. PrimeCare Medical, Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115169 (MD PA, Aug. 31, 2015), a Pennsylvania federal district court dismissed an inmate's claim that inadequate medical treatment violated not just his 8th Amendment rights, but also his free exercise rights when gastrointestinal pain made it impossible for him to attend religious services.

In Clay v. Livingston, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115702 (ND CA, Aug. 31, 2015), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed a complaint by a Muslim inmate who wanted lunch each day in addition to the Ramadan menu.  For the first 9 days he was not provided lunch.

In Frazier v. June, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116699 (D SC, Sept. 2, 2015), a South Carolina federal district court permitted an inmate to move ahead with his claim that his free exercise rights were infringed when his Bible was confiscated because of a limit on the number of books an inmate may have in his cell.

In Moon v. Samuels, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117092 (SD IL, Sept. 2, 2015), an Illinois federal district court permitted a Muslim inmate to move ahead with his complaint that prison officials prohibited Muslim prisoners from engaging in group prayer, while permitting inmates of other faiths to do so.

In Moon v. Walton, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117660 (SD IL, Sept. 3, 2015), an Illinois federal district court allowed a Muslim inmate to move ahead with his complaint that prison policy barred Muslim inmates from rolling up or cuffing the legs of their pants as called for by Muslim doctrine.

NY Education Commissioner Grants Religious Exemption From MMR Vaccination Requirement

In Appeal of N.C., (NYSED, Aug. 3, 2015), the New York Commissioner of Education granted a religious exemption from the public school immunization requirement to the son of a woman who had developed religious objections after her son had all of his immunizations except his second dose of the MMR vaccine.  The mother is an immigrant and a member of the Russian Orthodox Church. Her religious objections were formed after a conversation with a friend and research "on a few Bible and Christian blogs."  The Commissioner described petitioner's objections as follows:

Petitioner states that “our fate is in the hands of our Lord, even if He decides that we should have a flu or measles.”  She further states that “mortality is, and should be, in God’s hands” and thus “vaccination intercedes upon God’s rightful realm, as if being in God’s care alone is not assurance enough for us.”  In addition, petitioner states that she objects to vaccinations because they “contain cells of animal origin” which is counter to religious teachings that “blood [is] sacred” and should not be mixed “with foreign blood or any other impure matters.”  Petitioner further states that the “final straw” is that “a number of vaccines contain cells from aborted fetuses” and “abortion is clearly considered a mortal sin and is [an] abhorrent act to any Christian.”

Specifically petitioner alleged that "the MMR vaccine, the only vaccine at issue in this case, does contain human diploid cells that use aborted fetal cell lines."

The Commissioner held:

Based on the record before me, I conclude that the weight of the evidence supports petitioner's contentions that her opposition to the MMR vaccine stems from sincerely held religious beliefs.

New York Post last week reported on the decision.

7th Circuit Again Upholds Contraceptive Mandate Accommodation For Religious Non-Profits

In Grace Schools v. Burwell, (7th Cir., Sept. 4, 2015), the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 decision, rejected a RFRA challenge to the Obama administration's accommodation under the Affordable Care Act for religious non-profits that object to furnishing contraceptive coverage under their health insurance policies. The majority, relying to a large extent on the Circuit's recent decisions in Notre Dame and in Wheaton College, held that the accommodation does not impose a substantial burden on the free exercise rights of various Indiana-based Catholic non-profit charitable, educational and health care institutions.  The majority said in part:

The accommodation does not serve as a trigger or a conduit for the provision of contraceptive services.... It is the operation of federal law, not any actions that the plaintiffs must take, that causes the provisions of services that the plaintiffs find morally objectionable. The accommodation has the legal effect of removing from objectors any connection to the provision of contraceptive services. As we noted above, every other circuit court to consider the issue of whether the mandate imposes a substantial burden on religious exercise has come to the same conclusion.

However the majority maintained the district court's injunction in the case for 60 days to give the district court time to consider certain other arguments raised by plaintiffs.

Judge Manion dissented, saying in part:

The HHS accommodation is the long and winding extension cord the government uses to power its contraceptive mandate. It winds through regulations and additions and revisions. The court, through a perfunctory examination, interprets the accommodation’s twisted framework and holds that it frees the religious nonprofits from having to power the mandate themselves and, thus, does not violate the RFRA. The court is wrong: A thorough examination reveals that the accommodation’s tangled mess is hiding the fact that the extension cord gets its power from the nonprofits’ health plans and must be plugged in before it will work. It also exposes the fact that the government is forcing the nonprofits to plug in the accommodation themselves by signing the self‐certification or providing the alternative notice.

Tennessee Judge Says Obergefell Ended State Jurisdiction Over Contested Divorces

A Tennessee Chancery Court Judge, in what can only be described as a fit of judicial pique, last week used a divorce case in which he had substantial doubt about the parties' credibility to launch a verbal attack on the U.S. Supreme Court's same-sex marriage decision and develop a rather far-fetched theory of the decision's impact.  In Bumgardner v. Bumgardner, (TN Chan., Aug. 31, 2015), the court said in part:

With the U.S. Supreme Court having defined what must be recognized as a marriage, it would appear that Tennessee' s judiciary must now await the decision of the U. S. Supreme Court as to what is not a marriage, or better stated, when a marriage is no longer a marriage. The majority' s opinion in Obergefell, regardless of its patronizing and condescending verbiage, is now the law of the land....

Thus, it appears there may now be, at minimum ... concurrent jurisdiction between the state and federal courts with regard to marriage/divorce litigation. Perhaps even more troubling, however, is that there may also now be a new or enhanced field of jurisprudence— federal preemption by " judicial fiat." ...

[R]egardless of the states' traditional regulation of the area of marriage and divorce..., what actually appears to be the intent and ( more importantly) the effect of the Supreme Court ruling is to preempt state courts from addressing marriage/ divorce litigation altogether. ...

The conclusion reached by this Court is that Tennesseans, corporately, have been deemed by the U.S. Supreme Court to be incompetent to define and address such keystone/ central institutions such as marriage and, thereby, at minimum, contested divorces. Consequently, since only our federal courts are wise enough to address the issues of marriage— and therefore contested divorces— it only follows that this Court' s jurisdiction has been preempted. ...

Although this Court has some vague familiarity with the governmental theories of democracy, republicanism, socialism, communism, fascism, theocracy, and even despotism, implementation of this apparently new "super -federal -judicial" form of benign and benevolent government, termed " krytocracy" by some and " judi-idiocracy" by others, with its iron fist and limp wrist, represents quite a challenge for a state level trial court. In any event, it should be noted that the victory of personal rights and liberty over the intrusion of state government provided by the majority opinion in Obergefell is held by this Court only to have divested subject matter jurisdiction from this Court when a divorce is contested.

Huffington Post reports on the decision.

10th Circuit Denies En Banc Review, Over 5 Dissents, In Contraceptive Mandate Case

As previously reported, in July, without seeking en banc review, a petition for certiorari was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court for review of the 10th Circuit's panel decision upholding application of the Obama Administration's Affordable Care Act accommodation for religious non-profits to Little Sisters of the Poor. Nevertheless, 10th Circuit judges sua sponte called for a vote on whether the panel decision should be reviewed en banc. In Little Sisters of the Poor Home for the Aged v. Burwell, (10th Cir., Sept. 3, 2015), a majority of the judges voted to deny a rehearing, but 5 judges filed a dissent to the denial. Judge Hartz's dissent, joined by Judges Kelly, Tymkovich, Gorsuch and Holmes, calls the 3-judge panel's decision "clearly and gravely wrong." The dissenters say in part:

the panel majority may be saying that it is the court’s prerogative to determine whether requiring the plaintiffs to execute the documents substantially burdens their core religious belief, regardless of whether the plaintiffs have a “derivative” religious belief that executing the documents is sinful. This is a dangerous approach to religious liberty.

Christian Post reports on the court's decision.

Oregon Judge Creates Legal Defense Fund After Refusal To Perform Same-Sex Marriages

In Marion County, Oregon, Circuit Judge Vance Day, former chairman of the state Republican Party, has apparently decided for religious reasons not to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies.  This has led to inquiries by the Oregon Commission on Judicial Fitness and Disability as to whether Day has violated the Oregon Code of Judicial Conduct or the Oregon Constitution.  The Oregonian reports that yesterday the Oregon Government Ethics Commission voted unanimously to approve Day's request to establish a legal defense fund in connection with these inquiries.

No Damage Remedy Available To Muslims Placed On No-Fly List For Retaliatory Reasons

In Tanvir v. Lynch, (SD NY, Sept. 3, 2015), Muslim plaintiffs sued claiming that when they refused to become FBI informants, partly because doing so would violate their religious beliefs, the government retaliated by placing them on the No-Fly List.  Subsequently they were removed from the list, but continued to pursue claims for damages.  The court held that it will not extend a Bivens  damage remedy to this new context, and that RFRA does not provide for money damages against federal officers in their personal capacities. The Center for Constitutional Rights issued a press release reacting to the decision.

Constable Applicant Can Sue Over Religious and Ideological Questions In Job Interview

In Texas, County Constable is an elected position, but where a sitting Constable resigns more than a year before the next scheduled election county commissioners may appoint a new constable to serve until the next election.  In Lloyd v. Birkman, (WD TX, Sept. 2, 2015), a Texas federal district court in a 106-page opinion held that one of the unsuccessful candidates for appointment as County Constable in Williamson County, Texas could pursue various claims against the county and individual commissioners because of the questions asked during the interview process for the position. According to the court:

During the interviews, the candidates received questions on their positions on abortion and same-sex marriage, their political affiliations, the churches that they attended, and their political ideology.

While dismissing some of plaintiff's claims, the court permitted plaintiff to move ahead with his claim that the County committed an unlawful employment practice under Title VII and Texas Commission on Human Rights Act by refusing to hire him because of his religious association, moral views, and ethical beliefs. The court held that the "elected official" exemption does not apply. The court also permitted plaintiff to move ahead against the county and individual defendants on his First Amendment retaliation, freedom of expression and association claims; his 14th Amendment Equal Protection claims; and Texas Constitutional claims. The court rejected plaintiff's violation of privacy claims.

Suit Seeks Halal Meals In Florida Jails

Yesterday in Florida, the ACLU and CAIR filed a class action lawsuit seeking to require Miami-Dade County jails to serve Halal meals to Muslim inmates. (ACLU press release). The complaint (full text) in CAIR Florida, Inc. v. Miami-Dade County, (SD FL, filed 9/3/2015), contends that denying Halal meals to Muslim inmates while furnishing kosher meals to Jewish inmates violates RLUIPA, and the free exercise and equal protection clauses of the U.S. and Florida constitutions. Prior to October 2014, Muslim inmates could obtain the kosher diet; since then they are required to eat the from the general population menu. Miami Herald reports on the lawsuit.

Recalcitrant Kentucky County Clerk Jailed For Contempt; Deputies Will Issue Marriage Licenses

In Ashland, Kentucky today, federal district judge David Bunning ordered Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis to be remanded to the custody of U.S. Marshals after she told the court that her religious objections to same-sex marriage prevent her from complying with the court's preliminary injunction ordering her to end her office's refusal to issue marriage licences. (See prior posting.)  According to the ACLU, the court also granted its motion and clarified that the preliminary injunction requires Davis' office to issue marriage licenses to all eligible couples in Rowan County, and not just to the four couples named as plaintiffs in the case.  [UPDATE: Full text of order.] The Lexington Herald-Leader reports on what happened then:

After U.S. marshals took Davis into custody, where she is expected to remain until she agrees to comply with Bunning's order, the judge ordered her six deputy clerks to stand and tell him if they would comply with his order to issue marriage licenses, at the risk of facing their own contempt penalties.

All but one of the deputies — Nathan Davis, Kim Davis' son — said they would obey the judge, some more reluctantly than others..... Bunning said he would not hold the younger Davis in contempt since the rest of his colleagues are willing to obey the law.

So on Friday, the Rowan County clerk's office is set to open without its clerk, for the first time recognizing the Supreme Court's landmark gay marriage decision....

Later in the day, after Bunning established that five of Davis' deputy clerks were willing to issue marriage licenses, Davis' lawyers asked the judge to reconsider sending her to jail. If the people of Rowan County can get a marriage license from the clerk's office, even if it's over Davis' objections, then surely the judge's order is satisfied, the lawyers said.

But Davis scotched that effort by informing Bunning, from a courthouse holding cell, that she would not agree to let her deputies obey the judge's order if she is released. With a shrug, Bunning said Davis will remain incarcerated for at least a week, until he can review how her office operates in her absence. She was taken to the Carter County jail but can free herself by agreeing to comply with his order, Bunning said.

Davis' lawyers released a statement today, saying in part:

All [Davis] asks is to be true to God and her conscience. And the tragedy is that there are simple ways to accommodate her convictions. Just remove her name from the marriage licenses. That’s all she has asked from the beginning. Today’s events will escalate this debate to a new level. This is not the kind of America the Founders envisioned or that most Americans want.”

According to the Louisville Courier-Journal, there remains a question of whether licenses issued by deputy clerks are legally valid under Kentucky law if issued without Davis' consent. Judge Bunning said that couples would need to assess that risk on their own.

EEOC Complaint Alleges Failure To Accommodate Muslim Flight Attendant

According to Michigan Radio, a complaint was filed this week with the EEOC by  Charee Stanley, a Muslim flight attendant now on unpaid leave from ExpressJet.  When Stanley converted to Islam two years ago, she arranged for fellow flight attendants to serve alcohol on her behalf.  However last month another employee filed a complaint that this arrangement required the employee to perform extra work. This led to the airline placing Stanley on leave. The same person allegedly made comments to Stanley about her head covering and expressed anti-Muslim sentiments to her. Stanley seeks reasonable accommodation of her religious beliefs.

Case Again Examines NLRB Jurisdiction Over Religious Colleges

Last year in the Pacific Lutheran University case, the National Labor Relations Board developed a new test for when it will assert jurisdiction over a religiously-affiliated college. Even if the college holds itself out as providing a religious educational environment, the NLRB will assert jurisdiction unless the faculty members seeking to organize are themselves held out as performing a specific role in maintaining the college's religious character. (See prior posting.) Last March, applying that test, an NLRB Regional Director held that it had jurisdiction over a faculty union election at Seattle University. (See prior posting.) The University appealed to the full NLRB, and in June it ordered the Regional Director to reopen the record so the parties could introduce additional evidence relevant to the NLRB's new Pacific Lutheran test. (Docket).

In an August 17, 2015 opinion (full text), the Regional Director examined at length that additional evidence relating to how the faculty is held out and again concluded that the NLRB has jurisdiction over them.  Lexology analyzes that decision. On August 31, the University filed a 50-page request for review of the Regional Director's latest decision (full text), arguing not just that the Pacific Lutheran test was misapplied, but arguing also:

The new test under PLU  contravenes the United States Supreme Court’s holding in  National Labor Relations Board v. Catholic Bishop of Chicago ... which held that Congress did not intend to bring teachers at church-operated schools within the  jurisdiction of the Act. The PLU  test contains the same constitutional infirmities as existed in the Board’s former “substantial religious character” test, which caused the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to require a simple, “bright line” test to determine Board jurisdiction over religiously-affiliated colleges and universities..... 

Suit Charges Pet Store Chain With Discrimination Against Persians

Courthouse News Service reports on a discrimination lawsuit filed against Petco Animal Supplies Stores for refusing to sell goldfish to individuals of Persian descent who want to use the fish to celebrate Nowruz, the Persian New Year.  Nowruz  is a secular holiday with roots in Zoroastrianism.  It appears that Petco may have incorrectly believed that the fish would be killed as part of the celebration. The suit was filed in state court in Los Angeles on Aug. 28.

Kentucky County Clerk Continues To Refuse To Issue Marriage Licences; Contempt Motion Filed

As reported by the New York Times, Rowan County, Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis yesterday continued to refuse to allow her office to issue marriage licenses because of her religious objections to same-sex marriage, even though the U.S. Supreme Court refused to extend the stay of a district court's ruling against Davis. She told protesters that in refusing to issue licences, she was acting "under God's authority."  In a statement (full text) issued through her lawyers, Davis explained:

To issue a marriage license which conflicts with God’s definition of marriage, with my name affixed to the certificate, would violate my conscience. It is not a light issue for me. It is a Heaven or Hell decision. For me it is a decision of obedience. I have no animosity toward anyone and harbor no ill will. To me this has never been a gay or lesbian issue. It is about marriage and God’s word.

So, as announced by the ACLU, yesterday same-sex couples filed a motion (full text) asking the federal district court to hold Davis in contempt.  Plaintiffs also filed a second motion (full text) asking the district court to clarify that its original preliminary injunction requires Davis to issue marriage licenses not just to the named plaintiffs in the lawsuit, but to all individuals who are legally eligible to marry in Kentucky.  The district court has scheduled a contempt hearing for Thursday.

UPDATE: Here is Davis' formal court filing responding to the motion to hold her in contempt.

Pope's Upcoming Visit To U.S. Generates Church-State Concerns

With Pope Francis' visit to the United States now less than a month away (see prior posting), church-state questions are beginning to surface as they have with all recent Papal visits to the U.S.  Americans United announced Monday that it had sent a letter (full text) to officials in the cities the Pope will be visiting--Philadelphia, New York and Washington, D.C.-- as well as to federal officials expressing Establishment Clause concerns.  Citing reported extensive hosting plans by Philadelphia, the letter cautions:

government bodies must not provide any aid to a Pope’s religious activities that goes beyond the provision of services — such as police, safety, and security — that are regularly given for comparable public events of a similar size. 

Factional Disputes In Houses of Worship Are Increasingly Ending Up In Court

An article posted Monday by Reveal reports that increasingly factional disputes over control of mosques in the United States are ending up in civil courts.  The lengthy article discusses several such cases, saying in part:

Historically, the Muslim American community has kept its disputes private, sometimes turning to faith-based mediation. But as the number of mosques increases and Muslims integrate with mainstream America, conflicts involving clerics, congregations and mosques are seeping into secular courts from California to Texas and Florida.

Intergenerational friction offers significant fodder for legal actions. U.S. mosques are evolving from traditional institutions run by the eldest community members to democratized nonprofits with bylaws and elections, even women in positions of power. Oral traditions have become written.

However it is not just Muslims that are turning to civil courts.  Last Sunday in San Jose, California, over 5,000  members of a Sikh gurdwara cast ballots in a court-ordered election of officers.  The San Jose Mercury News reports that all 21 incumbents were re-elected, ending extensive litigation between a reformist faction and existing leaders who raised millions of dollars in the 1980's to build the gurdwara. Insurgents say that merely having an election was a victory.

5th Circuit Hears Oral Arguments In Prison Worship Case

On Monday, the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in Brown v. Livingston. (Audio of full arguments.) In the case, a Texas federal district court held that requiring staff or volunteers for group religious services violates RLUIPA rights of Muslim inmates. (See prior posting.)

India's Supreme Court Suspends and Grants Review of State Court Decision Outlawing Santhara

BBC reports that yesterday India's Supreme Court agreed to review a decision of the Rajasthan High Court that held Santhara, a traditional Jain practice of starving oneself to death to attain salvation, is suicide under India's Penal Code. (See prior posting.) The Supreme Court suspended the Rajasthan court's judgment while the appeal is in process.

District Court Expands Contraceptive Coverage Exemption To Secular Pro-Life Employers and Employees With Religious Objections

In March for Life v. Burwell, (D DC, Aug. 31, 2015), the D.C. federal district court held that the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage mandate violates equal protection principles of the Fifth Amendment insofar as it grants an exemption to houses of worship and their integrated auxiliaries, but not to a secular anti-abortion organization such as March for Life.  It went on to hold that for employees of March for Life who hold religious objections to participating in an insurance plan that covers contraceptives, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act requires the government to allow third-party insurers to offer the employees insurance plans consistent with their religious beliefs. The court enjoined the government from enforcing the contraceptive coverage mandate against March for Life, its health insurance issuer and the insurance issuer of the employee plaintiffs in the case. New York Times reports on the decision.

Suit Challenges Fayetteville, Arkansas Anti-Discrimination Ordinance

In Fayetteville, Arkansas, a group known as Protect Fayetteville filed suit yesterday challenging the city's Uniform Civil Rights Protection Ordinance 5781 which voters are casting ballots on in a referendum this month.  The Ordinance expands civil rights protections to include bans on discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, and creates a city Civil Rights Commission.  The Ordinance contains an exemption for churches, religious schools and daycare facilities, and religious organizations. Opponents, however, complain that there is no exemption for individual clergy. The Ordinance was enacted after voters repealed an earlier anti-discrimination law last year.  (See prior posting.) According to KFSM News, the lawsuit claims that the Ordinance violates Arkansas' recently enacted Intrastate Commerce Improvement Act that bars counties, municipalities and other political subdivisions from expanding civil rights protections beyond those found in state law. The lawsuit also claims the Ordinance violates freedom of religion and speech.

European Court Upholds Italy's Ban On Donation of IVF Embryos For Scientific Research

In Parrillo v. Italy, (ECHR, Aug. 27, 2015), the European Court of Human Rights in a Grand Chamber judgment held 16-1 that Italy did not violate the European Convention on Human Rights when it banned donating for scientific research unimplanted embryos created in carrying out in vitro fertilization. The Court's accompanying press release summarizes the majority opinion:

For the first time, the Court was called upon to rule on the question whether the “right to respect for private life” could encompass the right to make use of embryos obtained from IVF for the purposes of donating them to scientific research. The “family life” aspect of Article 8 was not in issue here, since Ms Parrillo had chosen not to go ahead with a pregnancy with the embryos in question.

The Court, noting that the embryos obtained through IVF contained the genetic material of the person in question and accordingly represented a constituent part of his or her identity, concluded that Ms Parrillo’s ability to exercise a choice regarding the fate of her embryos concerned an intimate aspect of her personal life and accordingly related to her right to self-determination. The Court also took into account the importance attached by the domestic legal system to the freedom of choice of parents regarding the fate of embryos not destined for implantation. It therefore concluded that Article 8 was applicable in this case.....

The Court concluded that Italy had not overstepped the wide margin of appreciation enjoyed by it in this case and that the ban in question had been “necessary in a democratic society”. In consequence, there had been no violation of Article 8.

Six separate partly or fully concurring and dissenting opinions were also filed. As reported by the Times of Malta, a partly dissenting opinion of 5 judges said in part:

 Unlike the majority, we do not consider that embryos can be reduced to constituent parts of anyone else’s identity—biological or otherwise. Whilst sharing the genetic make-up of its biological ‘parents’, an embryo is, at the same time, a separate and distinct entity albeit at the very earliest stages of human development.

Supreme Court Refuses To Stay Order Requiring Kentucky Clerk To Issue Same-Sex Marriage Licenses

The U.S. Supreme Court yesterday in Davis v. Miller denied an application (full text of order) to stay pending appeal a district court decision requiring a Kentucky count clerk to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.  The clerk, Kim Davis, has religious objections to same-sex marriage. The application made to Justice Kagan was referred by her to the full Court which denied the stay. New York Times reports on the Supreme Court's decision.

9th Circuit Rejects Challenge To Big Mountain Jesus Statue

In Freedom From Religion Foundation v. Weber, (9th Cir., Aug. 31, 2015), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in a fragmented decision upheld the district court's rejection of a challenge to the Jesus statue on Montana's Big Mountain.  Judge Owens' opinion concluded that the Forest Service's renewal of the special use permit allowing the statue to remain on federal land did not violate the Establishment Clause.  The decision to renew reflected primarily a secular purpose and did not constitute an endorsement of religion.  Judge Owens said in part:

besides the statue’s likeness, there is nothing in the display or setting to suggest a religious message.... the flippant interactions of locals and tourists with the statue suggest secular perceptions and uses: decorating it in mardi gras beads, adorning it in ski gear, taking pictures with it, high-fiving it as they ski by, and posing in Facebook pictures....

Judge Smith, concurring, said in part:

Given the assumption made by both the majority and the dissent—that the Forest Service’s action (the renewal of a special use permit) constituted government action that could violate the Establishment Clause—I agree with the majority..... However, I write separately, because the assumption is incorrect. The Forest Service’s renewal of a special use permit for an existing monument does not constitute government speech.

Judge Pregerson dissenting said in part:

First, despite arguments to the contrary, a twelve-foot tall statue of Jesus situated on government-leased land cannot realistically be looked upon as “predominantly secular in nature.”... Second ... I submit that a “reasonable observer would perceive” the statue situated on government land “as projecting a message of religious endorsement.”

The Helena Independent Record reports on the decision.

US and Saudis Furnish Hajj Travel Information To Americans

The Hajj will take place this year approximately from Sept. 21 - 26. The U.S. State Department has posted a Hajj Fact Sheet on its website.  It reviews health, travel and safety considerations for U.S. citizens planning a trip to Saudi Arabia for the event. The Saudi Arabian embassy in Washington, D.C. has also posted a webpage titled Hajj Requirements, focusing on visas, travel and guidelines.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Frederick Mark Gedicks, Public, Private, Religious? Religious Freedom Restoration Acts in the U.S. States, (Quaderni Costituzionali, No. 3 (Bologna: Il Mulino, 2015 Forthcoming).
• Alagi Yorro Jallow, Freedom of Expression and Human Rights in Islamic Perspective, (August 15, 2015).
• Colin A. Devine, A Critique of the Secular Exceptions Approach to Religious Exemptions, (UCLA Law Review, Vol. 62, No. 1348, 2015).
• Tom Hickey, Judges as God's Philosophers: Re-Thinking 'Principle' in Constitutional Adjudication, (in L. Cahillane, J. Gallen and T. Hickey (eds), Judges, Politics and the Irish Constitution (Manchester University Press, 2016).
• Asifa Quraishi-Landes, The Sharia Problem with Sharia Legislation, (Ohio North University Law Review, Vol. 41, No. 545, 2015).
• Leonore Carpenter & David S. Cohen, A Union Unlike Any Other: Obergefell and the Doctrine of Marital Superiority, (August 28, 2015).
• Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, Vaccines, School Mandates, and California's Right to Education, (August 21, 2015).
• Jack B. Harrison, At Long Last Marriage, (American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law, Vol. 24, No. 1, 2015).

From SmartCILP:

• Christopher Ogolla, Public Health Implication of Religious Exemptions: A Balance Between Public Safety and Personal Choice, or Religion Gone Too Far?, 25 Health Matrix 257-307 (2015).

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Aziz v. Cruzen, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111862 (ND CA, Aug. 21, 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.

In Sioleski v. Sullivan, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111827 (WD NY, Aug. 24, 2015), a New York federal district court denied an inmate's motion for reconsideration of his previously dismissed complaint that on one occasion officials harassed him about his Native American hairstyle and placed him in keeplock for an hour while they decided whether his hairstyle complied with Department of Corrections rules.

In Peters v. Clarke, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 113380, Charles v. Clarke, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 113378, Cascen v. Clarke, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 113379, and Blyden v. Clarke, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 113377, (WD VA, Aug. 26, 2015), a Virginia federal district court dismissed complaints by Rastafarian inmates who were housed in the Violators Housing Unit for violating grooming regulations that they was not allowed to participate in Rastafarian group religious services outside the VHU pod.  In Blyden the court dismissed the additional complaint that while Rastafarian services are now available in the VHU, they lack a spiritual leader or reading material.

In Salyers v. Blue, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114243 (WD KY, Aug. 27, 2015), a Kentucky federal district court dismissed an Orthodox Christian inmate's complaint that while in isolation for protective custody, he was not allowed to participate in group religious functions with other inmates.

In Greybuffalo v. Wall, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114381 (WD WI, Aug. 28, 2015), a Wisconsin federal district court dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies a Native American inmate's request to have religious feasts at the conclusion religious ceremonies.

In Bargo v. Kelley, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114610 (ED AR, Aug. 28, 2015), an Arkansas federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114614, Aug. 5, 2015) and permitted an inmate who is a practitioner of the Hindu Kriya/Raja Yoga to move ahead with his claim for injunctive relief. He is seeking use of the barracks day room and chapel, and a Yoga mat, to practice Yoga.

Court Rejects Second Amended Complaint In RLUIPA Land Use Case

In Salman v. City of Phoenix, (D AZ, Aug. 27, 2015), an Arizona federal district court denied plaintiffs' motion for leave to file a Second Amended Complaint after dismissing plaintiffs' RLUIPA and state Free Exercise of Religion Act claims. At issue is the city's application of its building code to plaintiffs' use of their home for weekly Bible studies for 35 people. (See prior posting.) The court however gave plaintiffs two weeks to file another amended complaint curing prior pleading defects.

Tax Court Upholds Penalties Against Promoters of Evasionary "Corporation Sole" Tax Scheme

In Gardner v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, (USTC, Aug. 26, 2015), the U.S. Tax Court upheld $47,000 in penalties assessed by the Internal Revenue Service against a husband and wife who marketed to more than 300 people a tax evasion scheme involving the creation of a purported religious entity -- a "corporation sole."  Defendants claimed that taxpayers could turn otherwise taxable income into tax free income by assigning it to the corporation sole they create and control. BNA Daily Report for Executives [subscription required] reports on the decision.

Securities Fraud Defendant Gets Bail Because of Religious Affiliations

A major defendant in a massive securities fraud and money laundering case has been granted bail by a Brooklyn federal judge in large part because of the defendant's religious ties and credentials. The Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg News report details.  Vitaly Korchevsky is both a former Morgan Stanley Vice President and for decades has been a Baptist pastor.  He is charged with making more than $17 million in profits in an elaborate international scheme in which hackers broke into the computers of financial news disseminators and stole some 150,000 press releases.  They then passed information from the still confidential press releases to traders in the United States and Ukraine who realized $100 million profit in total from them. Korchevsky was born in Kazakhstan, and lived while young in the former Soviet Union, where he was beaten for keeping Bibles.  He is a prominent figure in the Slavic Baptist Church in the U.S. and elsewhere and serves as chairman of an association of 28 churches. 80 to 90 of his supporters showed up at his bail hearing.  In granting release on $2 million bond, Judge Raymond Dearie cited  "the faith that hundreds of people have put in [Korchevsky]."

Illinois Milk Law Change Was Pushed By Orthodox Jewish Group

Earlier this month (Aug. 6), Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner signed into law (effective next January) Illinois S.B. 1228 (full text) amending the state's Grade A Pasteurized Milk and Milk Products Act.  The new law requires milk in the state to be labeled in accordance with the federal Model Grade "A" Pasteurized Milk Ordinance.  The major change this makes stems from the provision in the federal model ordinance stating: "The common name of the hooved mammal producing the milk shall precede the name of the milk or milk product when the product is or is made from other than cattle's milk."  It turns out, according to a JTA report this week, that the primary proponent of this change was the Chicago Rabbinical Council, an Orthodox rabbinical and kosher certification organization.  Under Illinois' prior law, products sold as milk could have contained non-kosher milk from pigs or camels without the consumer being aware of that fact.

Kentucky Clerk Seeks Supreme Court Stay of Order Requiring Her To Issue Same-Sex Marriage Licenses

Today, Kim Davis, the Rowan County, Kentucky court clerk who has been refusing to allow her office to issue marriage licenses because of her religious objections to same-sex marriage, filed with the U.S. Supreme Court an Emergency Application (full text) to stay the district court's order against her while she appeals to the 6th Circuit.  The application, filed with Justice Kagan who is Circuit Justice for the 6th Circuit, includes a 40-page memorandum of law supporting the request for a stay.  The 6th Circuit has already refused a stay pending appeal. (See prior posting.)  A Liberty Counsel press release reported on the filing.