Polish Court Upholds Refusal To Recognize Pastafarians

Radio Poland reports that in Warsaw, Poland yesterday the Voivodship Administrative Court upheld the refusal by the Internal Affairs Ministry to list the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster in the register of religious denominations.  The court said that the Pastafarians still have the right to practice their religion, so neither the country's constitution nor international conventions were breached.  The church says it will appeal to the Supreme Administrative Court.

3rd Circuit Hears Oral Arguments In Ten Commandments Case

The U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments yesterday (audio of full arguments) in  Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. v. New Kensington-Arnold School District, a challenge to a Ten Commandments monument on the lawn of a Pennsylvania high school.  In the case, the federal district court held that plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge the monument because they had not been injured by its presence. (See prior posting.) The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reports on the case.

Ryan Appoints 2 USCIRF Members

In a press release yesterday, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom announced that on May 13, House Speaker Paul Ryan reappointed Villanova University faculty member Dr. Daniel Mark for a second 2-year term on the Commission.  Ryan also appointed Kristina Arriaga de Bucholz, executive director of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, to a 2-year term replacing Dr. Robert George whose term has expired. Appointments to the 9-member Commission are made by the President and by Congressional leaders of each party.

Colombia Court Ends Municipal Council Invocations

Fox News Latino reports that on May 10 a trial court judge in Cartagena, Colombia ordered a stop to invocations at the beginning of Municipal Council meetings and events of other public entities. Yesterday 1000 people demonstrated against the decision in front of city hall, carrying signs with messages such as:   "Cartagena is Christ's" and "God demands that we pray without ceasing."

Nevada Trial Court Rejects State Constitutional Challenge To School Choice Law

In Duncan v. Sate of Nevada, (NV Dist. Ct., May 18, 2016), a Nevada state trial court judge dismissed state constitutional challenges to Nevada's new Educational Savings Account program. The program, more extensive than any other in the country, allows parents of any child who has attended a public or charter school for at least 100 days to receive into an educational savings account a portion of the state's funding for use at an eligible alternative private (including religious) school. Finding that plaintiffs had standing only to bring facial challenges, the court held that the program does not violate Nevada Constitution Art. XI, Sec. 2 that requires the legislature to provide a uniform public school system nor Art. XI, Sec. 10 that prohibits use of public funds for sectarian purposes.

In a wide-ranging 45-page opinion, the court held that the state constitution does not limit the legislature to providing education only through a uniform public school system. It may also use other suitable means.  It also held that the prohibition on using public funds for sectarian purposes only imposes restrictions co-extensive with the federal Establishment Clause.

In January, another trial court judge enjoined implementation of the program. (See prior posting.) Reacting to yesterday's court's decision, Nevada Attorney General Adam Paul Laxalt said  in part (full text of statement): "The decision today clears the way for the Nevada Supreme Court to meaningfully address the remaining uncertainty caused by the injunction in the other case challenging Nevada’s ESA program. We are one giant step closer to helping thousands of Nevada families choose the best educational option for their children." AP reports on the decision and the ACLU's reaction to it.

6th Circuit Remands RLUIPA "Equal Terms" Zoning Challenge

In Tree of Life Christian Schools v. City of Upper Arlington, (6th Cir., May 18, 2016), the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in a 2-1 decision reversed and remanded in a RLUIPA land use case, finding that material facts remain as to the application of RLUIPA's "equal terms" provision.  At issue is an Ohio city's refusal to rezone a large office building for use as a religious school. The office building is in an area zoned as an "Office and Research District" -- an area designed for uses that would maximize the city's tax revenues. The majority said in part:

The religious land use that TOL Christian Schools proposes is, we assume without deciding, deleterious to the purpose of the regulation at issue (which we assume to be increasing income-tax revenue). But the nonreligious uses that the government concedes it would allow seem to be similarly situated to the regulation..... [T]he government suggested at oral argument that it would prefer that [the property] be used for an ambulatory care center or outpatient surgery center. But we cannot assume as a fact... that an ambulatory care center (or an outpatient surgery center, or a data and call center, or office space for a not-for-profit organization, or a daycare) would employ higher-income workers than TOL Christian Schools would.... 

Proposed RFRA Amendment Would Bar Its Use To Discriminate or Injure 3rd Parties

Yesterday two members of the U.S. House of Representatives, Joe Kennedy III and Bobby Scott, announced the introduction of the Do No Harm Act (full text). The bill would amend the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to preclude its use in ways that result in discrimination or harm to third parties or impose one person's religious views on another. More specifically, the bill would preclude using RFRA to create religious exemptions from various civil rights laws or labor laws, or accommodations which limit access to health care, or receipt of goods or services from the government or from government contractors or grantees.

Australian Agency Refuses to Approve Trademark For "McKosher"

Australia's ABC News reported last week that the Australian Trademark Office has refused to approve an application to trademark the name "McKosher" because of the danger of contextual confusion.  The application was submitted by New South Wales resident Mark Glaser who wants to open a Scottish-Jewish restaurant in Maclean, an Australian city with Scottish ties.  However the international McDonald's chain objected because it is in negotiations with Rabbinical leaders in Jerusalem to use the McKosher title as the name for kosher certified McDonald's restaurants in Israel.  Currently the Israeli rabbinate refuses to certify kosher branches of McDonald's for fear that the public will confuse the branches which are kosher with those that are not.

"Philly Jesus" Says Trespassing Charge Reflects Religious Discrimination

Recovered drug addict Michael Grant who is well known as "Philly Jesus" in Center City Philadelphia is defending against defiant trespassing and disorderly conduct charges by claiming religious discrimination.  NJ.com reported on Monday's Municipal Court hearing. Grant was arrested for blocking a pathway inside a local Apple store with the cross he was carrying. At the time he was charging his phone. His attorney says he was evicted because of his religious beliefs. Referring to his white iPhone, Grant says: "I'm on the family plan. Father, son and Holy Ghost."

Suit In France Says Social Media Failed To Remove Anti-Semitic, Racist, Homophobic and Terrorist Posts

According to the Economic Times, on Sunday in Paris three French groups filed a lawsuit against Twitter, YouTube and Facebook charging that they failed to adequately comply with a 2004 French law that requires deletion within a reasonable time of posts that are racist, anti-Semitic, homophobic or which defend terrorism.  Plaintiffs Jewish Students of France (UEJF), SOS-Racisme,  and SOC Homophobie say that between March 31 and May 10 they discovered 586 such posts, but that the number removed within a reasonable time was 4% by Twitter, 7% by YouTube and 34% by Facebook.

Same-Sex Couple's Newest Battle Is With Catholic Cemetery

NewNowNext and Advocate reported yesterday that Greg Bourke and Michael De Leon, a same-sex couple who were among the plaintiffs in one of the same-sex marriage cases decided by the Supreme Court along with Obergefell v. Hodges, are now at odds with a Catholic cemetery in Louisville, Kentucky. The couple, who have been together for 34 years and members of Our Lady of Lourdes Parish for 28 years purchased a joint burial plot in Saint Michael Cemetery. However the cemetery has refused to approve the headstone design which the couple submitted.  It features their names, interlocking wedding bands, a cross and a depiction of the U.S. Supreme Court building.  A letter from the cemetery informed the couple that it could not approve depictions of wedding rings and the Supreme Court on the headstone because this conflicts with teachings of the Church. In 2015, National Catholic Reporter named Bourke and De Leon "persons of the year" for "their historic roles as plaintiffs in Obergefell v. Hodges and for their faithful public witness as gay Catholics."

Suit Against Jeweler Says Employee Was Fired For Saying That Jews Killed Jesus

The New York Daily News last week reported on a lawsuit filed in federal district court in Manhattan by a former marketing executive at the upscale jeweler, Tiffany & Co.  Kristin Rightnour, a devout Catholic, says she was reprimanded and placed on probation for telling a Jewish colleague, in a conversation about Easter, that Catholics believe the Jewish people killed Jesus. Then, she alleges, she was skipped over for promotion and eventually fired after she filed a complaint with the EEOC.

Court Places Control of Historic Touro Synagogue In Hands of Newport, Rhode Island Congregation

Yesterday, in a 106 page opinion in Congregation Jeshuat Israel v. Congregation Shearith Israel, (D RI, May 16, 2016), a Rhode Island federal district court held that Newport, Rhode Island's Touro Synagogue is owned in charitable trust for the purpose of preserving a permanent place of Jewish public worship and that the trustee of the synagogue should be Newport's Congregation Jeshuat Israel.  In appointing the local congregation as trustee, the court removed New York's Shearith Israel congregation from that role finding that it had breached its duties.  The court also held that a  pair of historic silver Torah ornaments worth some $7 million previously owned by Newport's early Jewish residents are now owned by the local congregation which is free to sell them to raise funds to keep the synagogue open. New York Times reports on the decision. (See prior related posting.)

Religious Organizations Challenge NY Regulator's Required Abortion Coverage

In a May 10 press release, the Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany, New York announced that it, along with the Episcopal Diocese and several other religious groups has filed suit in New York state court challenging the constitutionality of Model Language adopted by the New York State Department of Financial Services that requires individual and small group employers offering health insurance to their employees to include in renewal contracts coverage for therapeutic abortions, and for non-therapeutic abortions in the case of rape, incest or fetal malformation. The complaint (full text) in Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany v. Vullo, (NY Sup. Ct. Albany Cty., filed 5/4/2016), contends that the abortion mandate violates religious freedom and liberty of conscience in violation of various provisions of the state and federal constitutions as well as of New York law. [Thanks to Jeff Pasek for the lead.]

Supreme Court "Punts" On Contraceptive Mandate Case

The U.S. Supreme Court today took the unusual step of sending the controversial dispute over the Obama administration's contraceptive mandate compromise for religious non-profits back to the relevant Courts of Appeals without giving those courts any guidance on the merits.  In a per curiam opinion in Zubik v. Burwell  (Sup. Ct., May 16, 2016), the Court said in part:

In light of the positions asserted by the parties in their supplemental briefs, the Court vacates the judgments below and remands to the respective United States Courts of Appeals for the Third, Fifth, Tenth, and D. C. Circuits. Given the gravity of the dispute and the substantial clarification and refinement in the positions of the parties, the parties on remand should be afforded an opportunity to arrive at an approach going forward that accommodates petitioners’ religious exercise while at the same time ensuring that women covered by petitioners’ health plans “receive full and equal health coverage, including contraceptive coverage.” ....

The Court expresses no view on the merits of the cases. In particular, the Court does not decide whether petitioners’ religious exercise has been substantially burdened, whether the Government has a compelling interest, or whether the current regulations are the least restrictive means of serving that interest.  Nothing in this opinion, or in the opinions or orders of the courts below, is to affect the ability of the Government to ensure that women covered by petitioners’ health plans “obtain, without cost, the full range of FDA approved contraceptives.” ... Through this litigation, petitioners have made the Government aware of their view that they meet “the requirements for exemption from the contraceptive coverage requirement on religious grounds.” ...  Because the Government may rely on this notice, the Government may not impose taxes or penalties on petitioners for failure to provide the relevant notice....

Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justice Ginsburg, filed a concurring opinion emphasizing that the Court has decided nothing about the merits of the case, warning that in the past some court had incorrectly read similar disclaimers by the Court as signaling something about the merits.

In separate orders, the Court applied its decision to six additional cases posing the same legal issue in which certiorari petitions were pending.  The Court's actions no doubt reflect a 4-4 split on the merits.  In its per curiam opinion today, the Court-- eternally hopeful--added:

We anticipate that the Courts of Appeals will allow the parties sufficient time to resolve any outstanding issues between them.

New York Times reports on the decision.

Supreme Court Denies Review In Two Religious Rights Cases

The U.S. Supreme Court today denied certiorari in Wayne County v. Bible Believers, (Docket No. 15-1090, cert. denied 5/16/2016) (Order List).  In the case, the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, sitting en banc, upheld the right of Bible Believers, a Christian group, to engage in provocative and offensive proselytizing of Muslims at the annual Dearborn, Michigan Arab International Festival. (See prior posting.)

The Supreme Court also denied certiorari in Rogers v. Roman Catholic Archbishop, (Docket No. 15-1105, cert. denied 5/16/2016) (Order List).  In the case, the Appeals Court of Massachusetts upheld an injunction against former parishioners of Frances X. Cabrini Church in Scituate who have held a 24-hour vigil in the church for over ten years in order to protest plans to close it. (See prior posting.)

Obama Appoints 2 USCIRF Commissioners

In a press release issued Friday, the U,S. Commission on International Religious Freedom announced appointments by President Obama to the Commission,  On May 12 the President announced his intention to reappoint Rev. Thomas J. Reese, S.J.and to appoint Dr. John Ruskay to two year terms.  Reese is a senior analyst for the National Catholic Reporter.  Ruskay is Executive Vice President-Emeritus of the United Jewish Appeal (UJA) Federation of Jewish Philanthropies of New York. Ruskay replaces Eric Schwartz whose term is expiring,

Man Pleads Guilty To Forcibly Removing Airline Passenger's Hijab

According to a Justice Department press release, on Friday a 37-year old North Carolina man pleaded guilty to one count of using force or the threat of force to intentionally obstruct a Muslim woman's free exercise of religion. In the plea agreement (full text) filed in New Mexico federal district court, defendant Gil Parker Payne admits that last December while on a Southwest Airlines flight from Chicago to Albuquerque he forcibly pulled the hijab off the head of a Muslim woman on the flight, telling her "Take it off! This is America!"  In the plea agreement, the government recommends a sentence of probation, with two months home detention, plus any fine or restitution set by the court.

Head of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, Vanita Gupta, mentioned this case among others in reviewing the government's recent hate crime prosecutions.  Her remarks came in a speech (full text) at the Muslim Advocates annual gala at which she accepted the Justice Thurgood Marshall Award.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Shivaraj S. Huchhanavar, Introduction to Traditional and Modern Natural Law Theories, (May 5, 2016).
• Brett G. Scharffs, Religious Majorities and Restrictions on Religion, (Notre Dame Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Farrah Ahmed, Remedying Personal Law Systems, (International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, Forthcoming).
• Brian Leiter, Why Tolerate Religion, Again? A Reply to Michael Mcconnell, (May 8, 2016).
• Kathleen A. McKee, Book Review: An Alternative to Business as Usual: Evangelical Christian Executives: A New Model for Business Corporations, (December 11, 2016).
• Engy Abdelkader, When Islamophobia Turns Violent: The 2016 U.S. Presidential Elections, (The Bridge Initiative, Georgetown University, 2016).
• Nasiru Wada Khalil, Perception and Reaction: The Representation of the Shari’a in Nollywood and Kanywood Films, (May 4, 2016).

From SmartCILP:

• Stephen R. Munzer, Secularization, Anti-Minority Sentiment, and Cultural Norms in the German Circumcision Controversy, 37 University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law 503-581 (2015).
• Symposium: Religion and the Law. Articles by Marc O. DeGirolami, Kevin C. Walsh, Benjamin Justice, Joshua A. Decker and Jonathan E. Amgott. 26 Stanford Law & Policy Review 385-553 (2015).

Paper Reviews Recent Use of Egypt's Blasphemy Law

Ahram Online today carries an interesting article on the use of Egypt's blasphemy law in recent months. Prosecutors have just begun to investigate a complaint against the satirical performance art troupe Atfal El-Shawaree (Street Children) over a video that they posted online mimicking the hosts on the state-owned religious radio station Al-Quran Al-Karim (The Holy Quran). At least one member of Parliament is proposing repeal of Article 98(f) of the criminal code that prohibits promoting "contempt of any divine religion or its adherents."

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Harvey v. Segura, (10th Cir., May 10, 2016), the 10th Circuit affirmed the dismissal of an inmate's complaint that authorities confiscated his  kufi.

In Vazquez v. Maccone, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60372 (ED NY, May 6, 2016), a New York federal district court held that plaintiff's inability to kneel on the floor to silently pray while temporarily held in the squad room for arrest processing did impose a substantial burden on his religious exercise.

In Jones v. Arizona Department of Corrections, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60454 (D Z, May 5, 2016), an Arizona federal district court permitted a Muslim inmate to proceed with his complaint that he was not permitted to grow his beard longer than one-quarter inch, and that the feeding time for Ramadan began too late.

In Phillips v. Cobb, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60716 (WD LA, May 6, 2016), a Louisiana federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60717, April 4, 2016) and dismissed a complaint by a Muslim inmate that he was not allowed to attend congregational jumu'ah services, receive a prayer rug or kufi or receive adequate meals during Ramadan.

In Desmond v. Phelps, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61406 (D DE, May 9, 2016), a Delaware federal district court refused to dismiss, but ordered an amended complaint with a more definite statement of plaintiffs' claims that authorities refused to allow Catholic inmates to worship, assemble, and celebrate on all religious holidays, and engaged in other sorts of retaliation.

In Jones v. Western Tidewater Regional Jail, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61425 (ED VA, May 6, 2016), a Virginia federal district court dismissed a complaint by a Rastafarian inmate that the food service provider and kitchen supervisor refused to serve him his religiously required vegan diet.

In Tillman v. Allen, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62260 (ED VA, May 9, 2016), a Virginia federal district court dismissed on various grounds a complaint by a Wiccan inmate that he could not attend Wiccan services, possess Wiccan objects or partake in the Common Fare diet.

EU Criticizes New State Laws In U.S. Which Restrict LGBT Rights

On Thursday the European External Action Service (the European Union's diplomatic service) issued a statement (full text) criticizing laws recently enacted in several U.S. states dealing with religious objections to same-sex relationships and with transgender restroom concerns.  The EU's statement reads in part:

The recently adopted laws including in the states of Mississippi, North Carolina and Tennessee, which discriminate against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons in the United States contravene the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which the US is a State party, and which states that the law shall prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection.

As a consequence, cultural, traditional or religious values cannot be invoked to justify any form of discrimination, including discrimination against LGBTI persons. These laws should be reconsidered as soon as possible.

Federal Government Issues Guidance Under Title IX On Rights of Transgender Students

The U.S. Justice Department and the Department of Education today released a letter (full text) providing Joint Guidance to schools and colleges on ensuring the civil rights of transgender students.  The Joint Guidance applies to schools covered by Title IX, i.e. schools that receive federal financial assistance. The Joint Guidance notes, however, that:

An educational institution that is controlled by a religious organization is exempt from Title IX to the extent that compliance would not be consistent with the religious tenets of such organization. 20 U.S.C. § 1681(a)(3); 34 C.F.R. § 106.12(a).

The letter states in part:

The Departments interpret Title IX to require that when a student or the student’s parent or guardian, as appropriate, notifies the school administration that the student will assert a gender identity that differs from previous representations or records, the school will begin treating the student consistent with the student’s gender identity. Under Title IX, there is no medical diagnosis or treatment requirement that students must meet as a prerequisite to being treated consistent with their gender identity....

A school’s Title IX obligation to ensure nondiscrimination on the basis of sex requires schools to provide transgender students equal access to educational programs and activities even in circumstances in which other students, parents, or community members raise objections or concerns. As is consistently recognized in civil rights cases, the desire to accommodate others’ discomfort cannot justify a policy that singles out and disadvantages a particular class of students....

Title IX’s implementing regulations permit a school to provide sex-segregated restrooms, locker rooms, shower facilities, housing, and athletic teams, as well as single-sex classes under certain circumstances. When a school provides sex-segregated activities and facilities, transgender students must be allowed to participate in such activities and access such facilities consistent with their gender identity.

Saudis, Iran At Odds Over Hajj Arrangements This Year

AlJazeera reported yesterday that Iranian Muslims may miss out on the Hajj this September because Iran and Saudi Arabia have been unable to agree on organizational details.  The two countries are at odds over transportation, security and procedures for issuing of visas this year. Last year 464 Iranians were among the 2000 pilgrims killed in a stampede during the Hajj.  Iran insists that the Saudis issue visas inside Iran through the Swiss embassy (the two countries have severed relations), while the Saudis say Iranians should use an online system. Also Iran wants to split pilgrims between Saudi and Iranian airlines.

Wedding Artists Challenge City's Public Accommodation Anti-Discrimination Ordinance

Two owners of an upscale hand painting and calligraphy business filed suit in an Arizona state court yesterday challenging the provision in the Phoenix city code, adopted in 2013, that bars public accommodations from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. The 88-page pre-enforcement complaint (full text) in Brush & Nib Studio, LC v. City of Phoenix, (AZ Super. Ct., filed 5/12/2016), contends that plaintiffs' free speech, free exercise and equal protection rights are infringed by requiring them to produce wedding invitations and similar wedding art for same-sex marriages. It also asserts that the statutory provision barring advertisements or notices that suggest discriminatory practices prevents plaintiffs from explaining their religious and artistic reasons for refusing to create custom art for same-sex weddings. An ADF press release announced the filing of the lawsuit.

Student's Complaint Over Expulsion From Catholic High School Dismissed Under Ecclesiastical Abstention Doctrine

In In re St. Thomas High School, (TX App., May 1, 2016), a Texas state appellate court held that the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine requires dismissal of a breach of contract lawsuit against a Catholic high school brought by a 16-year old student who was expelled and by his parents. The expulsion came after the parents sent the school a letter about the handling of a grade dispute.  The letter complained that the teacher involved had not called the parents as they had requested.  It alleged that when the teacher told the student the reason for failing to call-- he was too busy preparing for a romantic night with his wife to celebrate their wedding anniversary-- that this amounted to engaging in a discussion with the student "in a sexually harassing fashion."

The school concluded that the false accusations of sexual harassment against the teacher, made it impossible for other teachers to teach the student without fear of similar charges. The court said in part:

we conclude that St. Thomas’s status as a Catholic high school does not place it outside the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine’s reach. No less than a Catholic church, St. Thomas is a religious institution enjoying First Amendment protection for the free exercise of religion....

This record belies any contention that spiritual standards and religious doctrine play no role in the parties’ dispute. Plaintiffs expressly relied on the Catholic nature of a St. Thomas education to justify their demands....  In addition ... this record also demonstrates impermissible interference with St. Thomas’s management of its internal affairs and encroachment upon its internal governance.

Sandra Jolley Appointed To US Commission on International Religious Freedom

In a press release last week, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom announced that on April 27, Sandra Jolley was appointed to serve a two-year term on the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom.  Her appointment was made by Sen. Harry Reid, minority leader in the U.S. Senate.  Three commissioners are appointed by the President and six other are appointed by party leaders in the House and Senate. Jolley has been a leader in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Nevada.  She replaces Dr. Katrina Lantos Swett who served two terms on the Commission.

Florida Appeals Court Hears Oral Arguments In Scholarship Tax Credit Challenge

A Florida state appeals court on Tuesday heard oral arguments (video of full oral arguments) in McCall v. Scott, a constitutional challenge to the state's Tax Credit Scholarship Program.  A trial court dismissed the case, finding that plaintiffs lacked standing. (See prior posting.) Daily Business Review reports on the oral arguments.

Judge Orders Church To Hold New Election

In Rock Church, Inc. v Venigalla, (Sup. Ct. NY Cnty, May 3, 2016), a New York state trial court ordered conflicting factions in a small upper East Side nondenominational Christian church to hold a new special meeting of the Church's membership to vote for a Board of Trustees.  The court found that a previous election was invalidly held.  The court concluded that a second ballot after most members thought a membership meeting had ended resulted in a sham election without adequate notice to the membership, in violation of the Church's By-Laws. At issue is a dispute over whether the faction that supports the church's pastor, Daniel Iampaglia, or the faction seeking his dismissal will be elected.  At one point, one of the opponents of Pastor Iampglia filed a police complaint charging him with petit larceny for taking funds from the church offeratory collections.  Iampaglia says the funds were used for church expenses as was the custom. New York Daily News reports on the decision.

4th Circuit Hears Oral Arguments In Graduation Prayer and Venue Case

On Tuesday, the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in American Humanist Association v. Greenville County School District. (Audio of full oral arguments.) At issue was the graduation ceremony prayer policy of the Greenville County, South Carolina school district, as well as its practice of holding some graduation ceremonies at a religious chapel on a local college campus. (See prior posting.) Greenville News reports on the oral arguments.

Ecclesiastical Abstention Requires Dismissal of Suit Over Sikh Temple Membership

In Singh v. Sandhar, (TX App., May 10, 2016), a Texas appellate court, on the basis of the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine, dismissed a suit contesting the membership list that was used by a Sikh temple in determining who was eligible to vote in an election to select members of the temple's 7-member executive committee known as the Prabandhak Committee. The court held:

The temple’s alleged failure to follow its bylaws on a matter of internal governance involves ecclesiastical concerns, and civil courts may not interfere in these matters when disposition of church property is not at stake. 

The Citadel Refuses Religious Accommodation In Uniform Requirement

Washington Post reported yesterday on a controversial decision by The Citadel to refuse a religious accommodation to its strict student uniform requirement.  The South Carolina public military college will not allow a Muslim student who has been admitted to wear her hijab. According to the paper:

[T]he fact that [the school] was considering an exception ... set off shock waves among alumni. The idea pleased some in the close-knit corps, who felt it could be an important symbol of religious freedom and inclusiveness. But it upset others who felt it would clash with the mission and ideals of the Citadel, where loyalty, teamwork and uniformity are paramount.

At the Citadel, students are expected to leave behind their individuality ... and form opinions based on character rather than appearance. Allowing one student to wear something completely different struck many as antithetical to that mission. And some objected, as well, because exceptions have apparently not ever been made for other religions. Christian cadets have been told not to display crosses, for example.

That the exception was being considered at a time when the role of Islam in U.S. culture is so polarizing ...  made the issue particularly incendiary far beyond the Charleston, S.C., campus.

Suit Challenges Maryland County Ten Commandments Monument

In March, a lawsuit was filed in federal district court in Maryland challenging a Ten Commandments monument located on the courthouse lawn in Cumberland, Maryland.  The complaint (full text) in Davis v. Allegany County Commissioners, (D MD, filed 3/8/2016), recounts plaintiff's efforts since 2004 to have the monument removed.  Apparently defendants were not actually served in the case until sometime between April 29 and May 6.  The Cumberland Times-News last week reported on the reaction of county officials to the lawsuit. They complain that plaintiff is not even a resident of the county and are obtaining free legal assistance in defending against the suit. One county commissioner added:

These items were manufactured and put out by (filmmaker) Cecil B. DeMille.  They sent these things out as promotional items for the [Ten Commandments] movie. It was never in a church. It is an historic monument in an historic area.

[Thanks to Bob Ritter for the lead.]

Minister Can Sue His Church For Disability Benefits

In Bigelow v. Sassafras Grove Baptist Church, (NC App., May 10, 2016), the North Carolina Court of Appeals held that neither the ministerial exception doctrine nor the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine bars a minister from suing his church for contractually promised disability compensation and benefits.  The court said in part:

because plaintiff’s complaint does not challenge the Church’s decision to terminate his employment, but instead seeks to enforce a contractual obligation regarding his compensation and benefits, we hold that the ministerial exception does not apply and is not a basis for dismissal of plaintiff’s claims....

because a court can decide plaintiff’s contract-based claims applying “neutral principles of law,” without entangling the Court in an ecclesiastical dispute or interpretation, we hold that the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine does not require dismissal of plaintiff’s complaint.

[Thanks to Will Esser via Religionlaw for the lead.] 

Italian Court Overturns Convictions For Eid al-Adha Sacrifice

An Italian appeals court last week overturned the animal cruelty conviction of two Romanian travelers who had been fined by a lower court for the public slaughter of a young goat to mark the Muslim festival Eid  al-Adah (the Feast of the Sacrifice). The Local yesterday reported on the decision by the appellate court in Genoa:

In overturning the conviction, judge Mauro Amisano wrote that animal cruelty charges “presume the lack of any valid motive which renders the cruelty abject and futile.”

Amisano added that the sacrifice had a valid motive as it was part of a religious festival and had been carried out according to longstanding tradition.

“As part of a religious practice, one can assume the men did not expose the animal to any additional suffering,” he added.

“It cannot be considered illegal because it is a practice which is permitted by the freedom of religious expression.”

Justice Department Sues North Carolina Over Transgender Bathroom Access

In a counter-suit to one filed by the governor of North Carolina (see prior posting), U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced yesterday that the Justice Department has filed suit against  the state of North Carolina, the University of North Carolina, and the North Carolina Department of Public Safety over H.B. 2, the state's new transgender bathroom law.  The complaint (full text) in United States v. State of North Carolina, (MD NC, filed 5/9/2016) seeks a declaratory judgment that in complying with H.B. 2,  defendants are discriminating on the basis of sex in violation Title VII and Title IX, and on the basis of sex and gender identity in violation of the Violence Against Women Act.  The suit also asks for injunctive relief.

Lawsuit Challenges Mississippi's New Freedom of Conscience Law

ACLU of Mississippi announced yesterday that it has filed suit against the state's Registrar of Vital Records on its own behalf and on behalf of a same-sex couple challenging recently enacted Mississippi H.B. 1523, the Freedom of Conscience From Government Discrimination Act.  While the Act broadly protects various actions of government and private businesses based on religious or moral beliefs that marriage is a union of one man and one woman, that sexual relations should be reserved to heterosexual marriage, or that gender is an immutable characteristic determined at birth (see prior posting), the lawsuit largely focuses on provisions allowing county clerks to recuse themselves from issuing marriage licences. The complaint (full text) in Alford v. Moulder, (SD MS, filed 5/9/2016) seeks declaratory and injunctive relief that the law violates the equal protection and due process clauses of the 14th Amendment.  It argues that the requirement for the Registrar of Vital Records to keep a list of those who have opted out of performing same-sex marriages amounts to creation of a "no-same-sex couples allowed" list.  Alluding to the other provisions of the law, the complaint adds:

HB 1325 subjects same-sex married couples in Mississippi to a lifetime of potentially humiliating denials of ordinary assistance and places a badge of inferiority upon their marriages each time they celebrate one of the ordinary incidents of family life.

North Carolina Sues Feds In Transgender Bathroom Dispute

As previously reported, last week the U.S. Department of Justice sent a letter to North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory warning that compliance with North Carolina's recently enacted House Bill 2 on transgender bathroom access places the state in violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and threatens millions of dollars in federal funding.  The letter called for a response from the state by today.  As reported by the Washington Post, this morning Gov. McCrory filed suit against the federal government challenging its interpretation of the federal civil rights laws.  The complaint (full text) in McCrory v. United States, (ED NC, filed 5/9/2016) asserts that the Justice Department's position constitutes "a baseless and blatant overreach."  It argues in part:

This is an attempt to unilaterally rewrite long-established federal civil rights laws in a manner that is wholly inconsistent with the intent of Congress and disregards decades of statutory interpretation  by the Courts. The overwhelming weight of legal authority recognizes that transgender status is not a protected class under Title VII. If the United States desires a new protected class under Title VII, it must seek such action by the United States Congress.... Moreover, the Department has similarly overreached in its interpretation of the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 (“VAWA”).

The University of North Carolina, which was also warned by the Justice Department in connection with its obligations under Title IX, was not one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit.

Resource On Eagles Ten Commandments Monuments

Many of the cases challenging Ten Commandments displays have involved one of the 186 Ten Commandments monuments donated to state and local governments since 1954 by the Fraternal Order of Eagles.  Bob Ritter at the Jefferson Madison Center now has posted links to photos of 173 of the FOE monuments. His website also has other information on the Eagles monuments and the litigation challenging them.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Thomas C. Berg, Partly Acculturated Religious Activity: A Case for Accommodating Religious Nonprofits, (Notre Dame Law Review, Vol. 91, Forthcoming).
• Robert A. Katz, The Role of Public Reason in Obergefell v. Hodges, (FIU Law Review 117 (2016)).
• Linda H, Edwards, Hearing Voices: Non-Party Stories in Abortion and Gay Rights Advocacy, (2015 Mich. St. L. Rev. 1327).
• Linda Sugin, Rhetoric and Reality in the Tax Law of Charity, (Fordham Law Review, Vol. 84, No. 101, 2016).
• Evelyn Brody, The 21st Century Fight Over Who Sets the Terms of the Charity Property Tax Exemption, (Exempt Organization Tax Review, Vol. 77, No. 4, 2016).

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

• Benjamin Shmueli & Yuval Sinai, Victim Pays Damages to Tortfeasor: The When and Wherefore,  (McGill Law Journal, Vol. 61, No. 2, 2015).
• Benjamin Shmueli, Tax, Don't Ban: A Comparative Look at Harmful But Legitimate Islamic Family Practices Actionable Under Tort Law, (Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 2016).
• Victor M. Muniz-Fraticelli & Lawrence David, Religious Institutionalism in a Canadian Context, (Osgoode Legal Studies Research Paper No. 43/2016 (2015)).
• Jens T. Theilen, The Long Road to Recognition: Transgender Rights and Transgender Reality in Europe, (Gerhard Schreiber (ed.), Transsexualität in Theologie und Neurowissenschaften. Ergebnisse, Kontroversen, Perspektiven (De Gruyter 2016)).
• Rebecca Christianne Lee, Forced Sterilization and Mandatory Divorce: How A Majority of Council of Europe Member States’ Laws Regarding Gender Identity Violate the Internationally and Regionally Established Human Rights of Trans* People, (Berkeley Journal of International Law 33:1 (2015)).

Suit Claims Sheriff Used Official Facebook Page To Proselytize

American Atheists announced Friday that it has filed suit against Bradley County, Tennessee Sheriff Eric Watson for using the sheriff department's Facebook page to promote the sheriff's Christian religious beliefs.  The complaint (full text) in American Atheists, Inc. v. Watson, (ED TN, filed 5/6/2016), alleges that the sheriff posted an Easter message and other messages that proselytized and deleted or blocked visitor comments on Facebook that were critical of the sheriff or his religion or policies.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Robinson v. Wetzel, (3d Cir., May 3, 2016), the 3rd Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a complaint by a Christian inmate held in the highest level of security that he was not allowed to view church services, Bible study and religious programming by closed-circuit television.

In Garnica v. Washington Department of Corrections, (9th Cir., May 5, 2016), the 9th Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a suit complaining that prison officials inadvertently provided plaintiff a low-calorie meal on the first day of Ramadan 2010 before correcting the error.

In Williams v. Does, (2d Cir., May 6, 2016), the 2nd Circuit reversed the district court and held that a Muslim inmate plausibly alleged a free exercise violation stemming from several of his Ramadan meals being served to him before sunset.

In Bradford v. Kramer, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58067 (SD IL, April 29, 2016), an Illinois federal district court permitted a Sunni Muslim pre-trial detainee to move ahead with his claim that 24-hour camera surveillance of him in his cell violates his religious belief that he can be seen nude only by his wife.

In Halsey v. Armstrong, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58436 (D OR, April 28, 2016), an Oregon federal magistrate judge dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies a complaint by a Muslim inmate that an officer insulted his religion; that he was wrongly removed from the Ramadan fast list because of false reports that he had broken the fast; and that he was subsequently precluded from engaging in any religious activities.

In Valerio v. New Hampshire Department of Corrections, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59237 (D NH, May 3, 2016), a New Hampshire federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59515, April 1, 2016) and, while dismissing a number of claims, allowed an inmate to move ahead with his complaint that his free exercise rights were infringed by a group strip search following a Christian revival event. His religious beliefs bar his being nude in front of other men.

In Bausman v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59514 (ED CA,May 3, 2016), a California federal magistrate judge allowed an inmate to proceed with his complaint that a change in regulations reduced the kinds of religious and cultural items that Native American inmates can possess.

In Hoffmann v. Price, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59520 (ED CA, May 3, 2016), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed with leave to amend an inmate's complaint that during a cell search officer went through his kosher food bags and placed his Torah open and face-down on the floor and leaving a boot print on it.

In Hampton v. Chaplin, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59583 (SD IN, May 4, 2016), an Indiana federal district court dismissed an inmate's suit claiming $1 million in damages for emotional distress when he was removed one time from religious services.

In Blankenship v. Setzer, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59862 (WD NC, May 5, 2016), a North Carolina federal district court dismissed a Christian inmate's complaint that his Bible was confiscated under jail policies that barred possession of books without covers, and that he was not permitted to take his Bible during transfers between jails.

Judicial Inquiry Commission Files Complaint Against Alabama CJ

As reported by AP, the Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission yesterday filed a Complaint (full text) against Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore contending that Moore abused his authority and acted in violation of the Code of Judicial Ethics when in January he issued an administrative order to all probate judges telling them that they had a duty under Alabama law to continue to refuse to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. (See prior posting.)  Moore's action ignored federal court orders to the contrary.

Church Sues Over Misrepresentation of Its Views On Same-Sex Marriage

A Hudsonville, Michigan church this week filed a false-light invasion of privacy lawsuit in Michigan state court against a gay rights activist whom it accuses of falsely representing that the church supports same-sex marriage. The complaint (full text) in Jenison Bible Church, Inc. v. VanderLey, (MI Cir. Ct., filed 5/3/2016), contends that when Bradlee Dean, a controversial Christian speaker opposed to same-sex marriage, was scheduled speak in the area, defendant Daniel VanderLey arranged a demonstration against him and sought to have local churches join it.  VanderLey sent demand letters to local churches, including Jenison Bible Church, telling them that unless they affirmatively opted out, VanderLey would arrange to have a sign saying that the church "stands for love not hate" displayed at the anti-Bradlee Dean rally.  The complaint contends that this public distortion of Jenison Bible Church's views on same-sex marriage and sexual immorality negatively impacts its ability to share the Gospel and damages its reputation in the eyes of other churches, it neighbors, and those potentially interested in joining the church. The suit seeks an injunction, a published retraction and a public apology. [Thanks to Brian D Wassom for the lead.]

Lawsuit Charges Restaurant With Discriminating Against Muslim Patrons

The Orange County Register reported yesterday on the messy facts surrounding a discrimination lawsuit filed by 7 Muslim women against a Laguna Beach, California restaurant.  On April 22, the women, most of whom were wearing hijabs, were sitting at a table on the uncrowded outdoor patio near the restaurant entrance.  They  were asked to leave for violating the restaurant's rule against remaining at a table more than 45 minutes after eating. The Register report fills in further details:

 “The women were singled out and targeted because they appeared to be Muslim,” said attorney Mohammad Tajsar. “Urth Caffe targeted these women as a way of cleansing their location of women that appeared to be Muslim to appease the Islamaphobia in a predominantly white Laguna Beach community.”

Shallom Berkman, owner of Urth Caffe, disputed the claims. His wife, Jilla, who is Muslim, was the one who advised management to call police after the women became rude toward restaurant staff, he said.

Urth Caffe announced Wednesday that it is being represented by the American Freedom Law Center, a firm that specializes in faith-based lawsuits.

“Urth Caffe did not discriminate against the women who have filed this fraudulent lawsuit," said David Yerushalmi, co-founder and senior counsel for the center. “The lead plaintiff (Sara Farsakh) in the frivolous lawsuit is ... a college-age activist for Palestinian causes. We intend to sue Farsakh and her co-conspirators for trespass and to seek damages.”

Lawsuit Challenges School's Accommodation of Transgender Rights and DOE's Rules

In the escalating war over transgender rights, a lawsuit was filed in federal district court in Illinois this week by a group of  high school students and their parents challenging an agreement between a Cook County school district and the Department of Education to permit a transgender student in one of the high schools access to girls' locker rooms. The suit also challenges the school district's policy of allowing students to use restrooms that correspond to their gender identity.

The 83-page complaint (full text) in Students and Parents for Privacy v. Department of Education, (ND IL, filed 5/4/2016), says that the school district was threatened with the loss of $6 million in federal funding if it did not agree to the arrangement. It alleges that the locker room agreement and restroom policy cause students to lose their constitutionally protected right of privacy by requiring them to have their partially or fully unclothed bodies exposed to persons of the opposite sex.  The complaint contends that this also violates students' right under Title IX to an education that is free from a hostile environment based on sex, and infringes parents' rights to control the upbringing and education of their children.

The suit also contends that the Department of Education acted contrary to law when it interpreted Title IX's reference to "sex" discrimination as including "gender identity." Chicago Tribune reported on the lawsuit.

FFRF Sues House Chaplain Over Invocation Requirements

The Freedom From Religion Foundation yesterday filed suit in federal district court in Washington, D.C. against the U.S. House of Representatives, its Chaplain and other House officials.  The complaint (full text) in Barker v. House of Representatives, (D DC, filed 5/5/2016), challenges the criteria used by the current House Chaplain in approving guest chaplains who deliver some 40% of the invocations opening House sessions. The House Chaplain requires that the guest chaplain be sponsored by a member of the House, be ordained, and deliver an invocation addressed to a "higher power."  Plaintiff Daniel Barker, co-president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, says he meets all these requirements, but was not permitted to deliver an invocation on the ground that his ordination is not in a religion that he now practices. The complaint alleges more generally that "the guest chaplain requirements are inherently discriminatory against the nonreligious and minority religions." The suit seeks declaratory and injunctive relief.

FFRF issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit, saying in part:

FFRF is asking the ... Court ... to declare that barring atheists and other nonreligious individuals from the position of guest chaplain violates the Constitution and RFRA, and that requiring guest chaplains to invoke a supernatural power violates Article VI. The organization is also bringing an Establishment Clause claim under the First Amendment of the Constitution, pointing out the chaplain's office is showing an unconstitutional preference for religion over nonreligion.

"We take some satisfaction in filing this lawsuit on the National Day of Prayer, an unconstitutional law enacted at the behest of the Rev. Bill Graham in 1952 requiring the president to issue an annual proclamation exhorting citizens 'to turn to God in prayer, at churches,'" says Barker.

Megachurch Sued In Child Sexual Abuse Case

Yesterday's Tennessean reports on a civil lawsuit filed in a Tennessee state court last month against the megachurch Cornerstone Nashville and against a former church volunteer, Brian Mitchell, who allegedly sexually abused plaintiff in 2007 when plaintiff was ten years old. The paper reports:

The victim's mother had asked church staff to pair her son with a mentor, thinking he would benefit from an adult male role model since his father died by suicide when he was an infant, the lawsuit states. Church staff paired the boy with Mitchell despite his prior misdemeanor conviction of contributing to the delinquency of a minor....

The lawsuit also says church staff attempted to cover up their role by "making misleading statements in the news media, and blamed (the victim's) mother and family for (his) victimization."

The suit seeks $10 million in punitive damages, charging negligence and reckless or intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Today Has Been National Day of Prayer

Today has been the National Day of Prayer.  Under 36 USC Sec. 119, the president is to issue a proclamation each year "designating the first Thursday in May as a National Day of Prayer on which the people of the United States may turn to God in prayer and meditation at churches, in groups, and as individuals."  President Obama issued this year's Proclamation (full text) yesterday. The Proclamation reads in part:

In times of steady calm and extraordinary change alike, Americans of all walks of life have long turned to prayer to seek refuge, demonstrate gratitude, and discover peace.  Sustaining us through great uncertainty and moments of sorrow, prayer allows us an outlet for introspection, and for expressing our hopes, desires, and fears.  It offers strength in the face of hardship, and redemption when we falter.  Our country was founded on the idea of religious freedom, and we have long upheld the belief that how we pray and whether we pray are matters reserved for an individual's own conscience.  On National Day of Prayer, we rededicate ourselves to extending this freedom to all people.

The national observance, sponsored by the private National Day of Prayer Task Force, took place at the Canon House Office Building on Capitol Hill this morning.  The Task Force also announced today that  Anne Graham Lotz, daughter of Dr. Billy Graham, is succeeding Shirley Dobson as chair of the Task Force.  Dobson has served in that role for 25 years.

Today Is National Day of Reason

Today is National Day of Reason promoted by the American Humanist Association, and, as explained by them, designed to "affirm our commitment to the Constitutional separation of religion and government, and to celebrate Reason as the guiding principle of our secular democracy." According to an AHA press release:

In addition to leading the national push for a secular celebration of reason, the American Humanist Association also encourages state and local resolutions and proclamations to recognize the day. This year, Delaware Governor Jack Markell; Iowa Governor Terry Branstad; Colorado Governor John W. Hickenlooper; Mayor James A. Throgmorton of Iowa City, Iowa; Mayor Quentin Hart of Waterloo, Iowa; and Mayor Michael B. Hancock of the City and County of Denver, Colorado, have signed Day of Reason proclamations.

Links to the text of these proclamations, as well as one introduced into Congress, are available online.

Yom Hashoah Marked By Obama, Canadian Prime Minister

Yom Hashoah (Holocaust Remembrance Day) on the Jewish calendar began last night at sundown.  President Obama issued a Statement (full text) marking the day.  In addition to paying tribute to those who perished in the Holocaust, and those who survived it, the President also focused on contemporary anti-Semitism, saying:

Today, and every day, we stand in solidarity with the Jewish community both at home and abroad.  We stand with those who are leaving the European cities where they have lived for generations because they no longer feel safe, with the members of institutions that have been attacked because of their Jewish affiliations, and with the college students forced to confront swastikas appearing on their campuses.  And we call upon all people of good will to be vigilant and vocal against every form of bigotry.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau also issued a statement (full text) marking Yom Hashoah.

Transgender Bathroom Bills Trigger Strong Responses

Two developments yesterday highlight the reactions to legislative initiatives to ban transgender individuals from using restrooms that match their gender identity.  As reported by the New York Times, the Justice Department yesterday sent a letter (full text) to North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory warning that compliance with North Carolina's recently enacted House Bill 2 places the state in violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and threatens millions of dollars in federal funding.  The letter says in part:

Access to sex-segregated restrooms and other workplace facilities consistent with gender identity is a term, condition, or privilege of employment. Denying such access to transgender individuals, whose gender identity is different from their gender assigned at birth, while affording it to similarly situated non-transgender employees, violates Title VII.

The Justice Department also told the University of North Carolina that compliance violates Title IX, and told the state Department of Public Safety that it amounts to a violation of the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act.

Meanwhile, in Oxford, Alabama, the City Council voted 3-2 yesterday to rescind the public restroom ordinance that it passed last week.  (See prior posting.) The ordinance had not yet been signed by the mayor and so had not become law. As reported by Alabama Media Group, the ACLU was already planning a legal challenge, and the city attorney had warned that the ordinance as written might violate Title IX. The ordinance was a response to a policy announcement by Target stores that they welcome employees and customers to use restrooms and fitting rooms that correspond to their gender identity.

UPDATE: On May 2, the EEOC issued a Fact Sheet on Bathroom Access Rights for Transgender Employees Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Corporate Counsel reports on the EEOC's action.

Suit Challenges 25-Foot Cross In Florida Park

The American Humanist Association yesterday announced the filing of a federal court lawsuit against the city of Pensacola, Florida to challenge the city's ownership, maintenance and display of a 25-foot tall Christian cross that stands alone in the city's Bayview Park.  The complaint (full text) in Kondrat’yev v. City of Pensacola, Florida, (ND FL, filed 5/4/2016) says that the history of the cross is uncertain, but it is used solely for Christian Easter sunrise services each year. The cross was placed in the park sometime between 1951 and 1965, probably by the Jaycees. Easter services in the park pre-date the erection of the cross there. The lawsuit seeks an injunction ordering removal of the cross from government property.

6th Circuit: Remaining Convictions In Amish Beard-Cutting Case Stand

In United States v. Mullet, (6th Cir., May 4, 2016), the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed convictions of 15 members of the Bergholz, Ohio Amish community on charges of conspiracy, concealing evidence and lying to the FBI.  The convictions grew out of hair and beard-cutting attacks by one faction of the Amish community against other Amish. Originally defendants had also been convicted of hate crimes, but those convictions were reversed in an earlier appeal due to faulty jury instructions. The government chose not to retry defendants on those charges. (See prior posting.)  In yesterday's decision, the 6th Circuit held that because the challenges raised to the remaining convictions were not raised in the first appeal, they cannot be raised now.  The court also rejected various challenges to the sentences imposed by the trial court.  Reuters reports on the decision. [Thanks to Tom Rutledge for the lead.]

Muslim Woman Sues Long Beach Police Over Forced Removal of Hijab

A suit was filed last week in federal district court in California against the city of Long Beach and its police by a Muslim woman who says that her hijab (headscarf) was forcefully removed while she was being booked by police and held overnight in jail on outstanding warrant charges.  The complaint (full text) in Powell v. City of Long Beach, (ED CA, filed 4/29/2016), alleges that police policy violates RLUIPA, the 1st Amendment and the California constitution.  It seeks damages and an injunction requiring a change in policy so that the police department accommodates religious head wear of those being booked into police custody.  The suit also seeks to enjoin the public release of plaintiff's booking photo which shows her with her head uncovered. LA List reports on the lawsuit.

Suit Charges Rabbi With Sexual Abuse of High School Boy

AP reports on a federal court lawsuit filed yesterday in Connecticut by 28-year old Eliyahu Mirlis against Rabbi Daniel Greer and the Jewish high school and elementary school that the rabbi heads.  The suit alleges that between 2001 and 2005 Rabbi Greer (then in his 60's) forced plaintiff to engage in sexual acts with him. The suit alleges that the sexual assaults took place on school property, at Greer's home and elsewhere. Greer is a graduate of Princeton and Yale Law School.  In 2002 he testified before the state legislature in opposition to same-sex unions.  He was also previously a member of the New Haven police commissioners' board.  The suit also alleges that the schools allowed the abuse to go on for years, and that Greer abused at least one other boy.

Suit Claims Employer Required Watching of Scientology Based Videos

Yesterday's Las Vegas Review-Journal reported on an employment discrimination lawsuit filed April 26 against Real Water, a water bottling company owned by a member of the Nevada legislature.  Former "brand ambassador" Grecia Echevarria-Hernandez, a Catholic, alleged that company owner Brent Jones required her to watch self-improvement courses based on Scientology in order to qualify for raises or promotion.  She refused to do so.  Eventually she was fired. She claims this was because of her differing religious views.

President Declares May As Jewish American Heritage Month

Last week, President Obama issued a Proclamation (full text) declaring May as Jewish American Heritage Month. The Proclamation reads in part:

Jewish Americans, having shared in the struggle for freedom, have been instrumental in ensuring our Nation stays true to the principles enshrined in our founding documents. They have helped bring about enduring progress in every aspect of our society, shaping our country's character and embodying the values we hold dear.

Yesterday, Democratic leader Nancy Peolsi also issued a statement  on Jewish American Heritage Month.

Court Allows Challenges To NJ Law On Sale of Headstones To Proceed

In Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Newark v. Christie, (D NJ, April 29, 2016), a New Jersey federal district court refused to dismiss some of the challenges by the Catholic Archdiocese to a New Jersey statute making it illegal for religious groups that operate cemeteries to also sell monuments or private  mausoleums.  The court held that, even though the statute is subject only to rational-basis review, it is premature to dismiss claims that the law violates the equal protection and due process clauses of the U.S. Constitution.  The court did however dismiss plaintiffs' contracts clause and privileges or immunities clause challenges. The statute was enacted last year (see prior posting) after the Archdiocese went into competition with for-profit monument makers. New Jersey Law Journal reports on the decision. [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

5th Circuit: Texas Prisons' Grooming and Headwear Policies Violate RLUIPA

Reflecting the approach taken last year by the U.S. Supreme Court in Holt v. Hobbs (see prior posting), yesterday the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in Ali v. Stephens, (5th Cir., May 2, 2016) held that the Texas prison system's grooming and headwear policies violate a Muslim inmate's rights under RLUIPA.  The court affirmed the trial court's grant of declaratory and injuctive relief to allow an observant Muslim inmate to grow a 4-inch beard and wear his kufi throughout the prison facility.

Cert. Denied In Challenge To Alabama Prisoner Grooming Restrictions

The U.S. Supreme Court yesterday denied review in Knight v. Thompson, (Docket No. 15-999, cert. denied 5/2/2016). (Order List.) In the case, the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the Alabama prison system's grooming requirement that prohibited Native American inmates from wearing long hair, even for religious reasons. (See prior posting.) AP reports on the denial of certiorari.

USCIRF Issues 2016 Annual Report On Religious Freedom Abuses Around the World

The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom today released its 2016 Annual Report (full text). The Report recommends that the Secretary of State re-designate 9 countries as "countries of particular concern," i.e. countries that engage in or tolerate systematic, ongoing and egregious violations of religious freedom: Burma, China, Eritrea, Iran, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. It also recommends adding 8 other countries as CPC's: Central African Republic, Egypt, Iraq, Nigeria, Pakistan, Syria, Tajikistan, and Vietnam. (In fact on April 14, the State Department did add Tajikistan. See prior posting.)

USCIRF designated 10 countries as Tier 2 nations that have serious religious freedom issues, but which do not rise to the level of CPC's: Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Cuba, India, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Laos, Malaysia, Russia, and Turkey.

In making its recommendations, USCIRF said in part:

Non-state actors, such as transnational or local organizations, are some of the most egregious violators of religious freedom in today’s world. In some places, such as the Central African Republic and areas of Iraq and Syria, governments are either non-existent or incapable of addressing violations committed by non-state actors. USCIRF has concluded that the CPC classification should be expanded to allow for the designation of countries such as these, where particularly severe violations of religious freedom are occurring but a government does not exist or does not control its territory. Accordingly, USCIRF’s CPC recommendations reflect that approach. 

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Caroline Mala Corbin, Speech or Conduct: The Free Speech Claims of Wedding Vendors, (Emory Law Journal, Vol. 65, No. 241, 2016).
• Elizabeth Sepper, Gays in the Moralized Marketplace, (7 Ala. C.R. & C.L. L. Rev. 129 (2015)).
• Mark L. Movsesian, Of Human Dignities, (Notre Dame Law Review, Vol. 91, No. 4, 2016).
• Richard W. Garnett, Wrongful Discrimination? Religious Freedom, Pluralism, and Equality, (Timothy Shah, Thomas Farr & Jack Friedman, eds., Religious Freedom and Gay Rights: Emerging Conflicts in North America and Europe (Oxford University Press 2016)).
• Udo Schuklenk & Ricardo Smalling, Why Medical Professionals Have No Moral Claim to Conscientious Objection Accommodation in Liberal Democracies, (Journal of Medical Ethics 2016 doi:10.1136/medethics-2016-103560).
• Mahalia Jackman, They Called it the ‘Abominable Crime’: An Analysis of Heterosexual Support for Anti-Gay Laws in Barbados, Guyana and Trinidad and Tobago, (Sex Res Soc Policy, Vol. 13:130–141 (2016)).
• Annyssa Bellal, Beyond the Pale? Engaging the Islamic State on International Humanitarian Law, (Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law (Forthcoming)).
• Norman P. Ho, Confucian Jurisprudence, Dworkin, and Hard Cases, (Washington University Jurisprudence Review, Vol.10.1, Forthcoming).

From SmartCILP:

• Michael Scaperlanda, Scalia's Short Reply To 125 Years of Plenary Power, 68 Oklahoma Law Review 119-136 (2015).
• Symposium: Christianity and Human Rights. Articles by John Witte, Jr., Justin J. Latterell, Desmond M. Tutu, Nigel Biggar, Stanley Hauerwas, Robert M. Franklin, John Witte, Jr., Jean Porter, Russell Hittinger and Helen M. Alvare, 30 Journal of Law & Religion 353-495 (2015).

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Isakhanova v. Muniz, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55649 (ND CA, April 26, 2016), a California federal district court allowed a suit by the mother of a Muslim inmate to proceed.  While visiting her son in prison, the mother was held for several hours on suspicion of passing tobacco to her son. While being held she was questioned extensively about her religious beliefs and practices.

In Sims v. Wegman, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56251 (ED CA, April 27, 2016), a California federal magistrate judge allowed an inmate to move ahead with a complaint that he was denied a diet that complies with Nation of Islam requirements and was also denied a kosher diet as an alternative.

In Beaudette v. Winfrey, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56275 (ND CA, April 26, 2016), a California federal district court dismissed with leave to amend an inmate's claim that some of his Christian Identity religious material was removed when he was moved to administrative segregation, and the material was never returned to him.

In James v. Taylor, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55811 (MD GA, April 27, 2016), a Georgia federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56612, March 22, 2016) and dismissed a Muslim inmate's claim against the prison warden alleging that plaintiff was denied vegan meals required by his religion during a Mental Health Evaluation.

In Williams v. Cox, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56714 (SD GA, April 28, 2016), a Georgia federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing as moot a complaint by a Hebrew Israelite inmate that he was refused a work proscription for the Messianic/Sabbatarian date (as opposed to the Jewish date) for observance of Shavuot.

In Davilla v. Watts, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56721 (SD GA, April 28, 2016), a Georgia federal magistrate judge recommended  that plaintiff be allowed to move ahead with free exercise, RFRA and equal protection objections to the elimination of "Spiritual Mass" for Santeria inmates and other interferences with Santeria practices.

In Wolcott v. Board of Rabbis of Northern & Southern California, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56847 (ED CA, April 28, 2016), a California federal magistrate judge granted an inmate leave to file a third amended complaint alleging that Jewish inmates are allowed to possess Tefillin and a Tallit Katan only once a week in the chapel.

In Bayadi v. United States, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57232 (WD VA, April 29, 2016), a Virginia federal district court dismissed as frivolous an inmate's claim that language in the state constitution establishes Christianity as the state religion.

In Evans v. Aramark Food & Commissary Services, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57418 (SD NY, April 28, 2016), a New York federal court dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies a Muslim inmate's complaint that he was served insufficient amounts of food during Ramadan.

When Are Prison Chaplains "State Actors"?

In an opinion recommending dismissal of an inmate's First Amendment and RLUIPA claims, a California federal magistrate judge held that some decisions by prison staff chaplains do not amount to "state action" for constitutional purposes.  In Wolcott v. Board of Rabbis of Northern and Southern California, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57528 (ED CA, April 29, 2016), plaintiff sued the former and current Jewish chaplains at the California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility because he was not allowed to convert to Judaism.  The refusal to allow his conversion stemmed from policies of the Southern California Board of Rabbis and the California Commission of Jewish Chaplains -- to whom the various Department of Corrections Jewish Chaplains report-- that disallow conversion by inmates serving life sentences. The court concluded that the chaplains were not state actors, finding that neither the "public function" nor the "joint action" doctrines applied here. The opinion reads in part:

Whether an inmate is a follower of a particular religion is an ecclesiastical answer to a religious doctrine, not an administrative determination; whereas a decision whether an inmate should be put on an internal prison list as following a particular religion is an administrative determination..., and Plaintiff does not allege that he is not on the list identifying him as Jewish for purposes within the facility, nor do his allegation imply this....

The only religious activities that Plaintiff alleges have been infringed on are that he was not allowed to attend [clergy visits from] the Aleph Institute ... [or] purchase religious packages [from] the Aleph Institute that regarded him as a non-Jew.... Plaintiff was prohibited from engaging in religious activities in these instances by the Aleph Institute -- which is an outside, religious organization that has not been, and cannot be, pursued in this action.

Christian Retreat Center Not Subject To Hotel Room Tax

In Susquehanna County Commissioners v. Montrose Bible Conference, (PA Commonwlth. Ct., April 21, 2016), a 3-judge appellate court panel upheld a lower court's ruling that a retreat center operated by a Christian religious organization is not subject to the county's hotel room rental tax.  While most of the decision focused on a procedural issue, in a footnote the court set out the substantive conclusion:

Even if the County had preserved its issue in a post-trial motion, the trial court properly concluded that MBC is not subject to the hotel tax because the County failed to establish that MBC is a “hotel.”... [S]ection 3 of the Ordinance defines a “hotel” as a structure that holds itself out “as being available to provide overnight lodging . . . for consideration to persons seeking temporary accommodations.” Here, MBC holds itself out as a religious facility and does not provide lodging to persons merely seeking overnight accommodations.

PennRecord reports on the decision.

GITMO Judge Defers Lifting Order Accommodating Muslim Detainees After Remarks By Top Brass

As previously reported, early last year a military judge at Guantanamo Bay issued an interim order requiring authorities to stop using female guards to move 5 defendants held in a top-secret Guantanamo unit back and forth to meetings with their lawyers. Defendants had been refusing to meet with counsel because physical contact with the female guards violates their Muslim religious beliefs.  AP now reports that this past Thursday the military judge, Army Col. James Poh, issued a 39-page ruling (not yet publicly released) saying that he will eventually lift the order.  However he postponed doing so for six months to show his displeasure at criticism of the original order leveled by Defense Secretary Ash Carter and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Joseph Dunford during testimony before Congress in October. They called the judge's order outrageous.  Poh says that this kind of statement could be seen as an improper attempt to influence the Military Commission.  In his ruling, he said in part:

These comments were entirely inappropriate. They crossed the line. Senior military leaders should know better than to make these kinds of comments in a public forum during an ongoing trial.

He added that he did not take this step lightly, and might lift the order sooner if senior military officials took "appropriate action."

UPDATE: Here is the full text of the Military Commissions' ruling in United States v. Khalid Shaikh Mohammad, (MCTJ, April 28, 2016).

President Sends Greetings For Orthodox Christian Easter

In a White House press release (full text) yesterday, President Obama sent greetings to members of the Orthodox Christian community who are celebrating the Orthodox Easter this week end, saying in part:

Michelle and I extend our best wishes to members of the Orthodox Christian community here in America and around the world as they observe Holy Friday and the Feast of the Resurrection....

We lift up in prayer the members of the Orthodox community who have been persecuted for their faith and subjected to unspeakable acts of violence, and we seek the release of those who have been kidnapped.   We remember those who have been driven from their homelands and who have seen their religious institutions desecrated or destroyed. 

Michigan City Restores Cross On Sand Dune-- Sort Of...

As previously reported, in a controversial move last year that was unsuccessfully challenged by citizens, the city of Grand Haven, Michigan agreed to remove a 48 foot cross that had been displayed periodically on a city-owned sand dune for 50 years. The city turned the cross into a Coast Guard anchor. However, according to a report in the Washington Free Beacon, this week the Grand Haven City Council (with one of last year's councilmen having lost re-election) has now voted 3-2 to add a yardarm to a flag pole on the sand dune.  When the side arm is extended, the flag pole will look like a cross. That will happen on several holidays each year.

EEOC Sues Hospital Over Arbitrary Deadline For Religious Accommodation Requests

The EEOC announced today that it has filed a religious discrimination lawsuit against Mission Hospital based in Asheville, North Carolina.  At issue are requests by 3 employees for religious exemptions from the hospital's requirement that all employees receive the flu vaccine by December each year.  The hospital allows religious exemptions, but requires that the request be made by Sept. 1. The employees here made their requests after the deadline. The requests were denied and the employees were fired.  According to the EEOC:

An arbitrary deadline does not protect an employer from its obligation to provide a religious accommodation. An employer must consider, at the time it receives a request for a religious accommodation, whether the request can be granted without undue burden.

Alabama City Outlaws Restroom Use Conforming To Gender Identity That Differs From Birth Certificate

In the latest chapter in the "bathroom wars," on Tuesday the Oxford, Alabama City Council unanimously passed Ordinance No. 2016-18 (full text) barring anyone from using rest rooms or changing facilities that do not correspond to the gender stated on the person's birth certificate. A violation is punishable by a $500 fine and up to 6 months in jail.  As reported by the Anniston Star, Council's action came in response to last week's announcement by the department store chain Target that their employees and customers are welcome to use the restroom or fitting room facility that corresponds with their gender identity. Target has a store in Oxford.  Prosecutions under the new ordinance will only occur only if a violation is reported by a witness or committed in the presence of a police officer.  After passage of the ordinance, city council president Steven Waits read from a prepared statement, saying in part that the ordinance was enacted "to protect our women and children."