Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Scarpinato v. Indiana State Prison, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122795 (ND IN, Sept. 12, 2016), an Indiana federal district court dismissed an inmate's complaint that he was not allowed to have a Bible in his cell during periods he was in segregation.

In Thomas v. Lakin, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123182 (SD IL, Sept. 12, 2016), an Illinois federal district court allowed a Muslim inmate to move ahead with claims that jail authorities denied his request for a copy of the Qur'an, a prayer mat, religious worship services, and a religious diet.

In Hanson v. New Hampshire State Prison Literary Review Commission, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123935 (D NH, Sept. 12, 2016), a New Hampshire federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123936, Aug. 17, 2016) and dismissed an inmate's complaint that he was not allowed to receive a package containing the religious book The Shaolin Grandmasters' Text, and a non-religious book, Sailing a Serious Ocean, sent along with it.

In Gayle v. Harmon, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124565 (ED PA, Sept. 13, 2016), a Pennsylvania federal district court, dismissing a case, held that restrictions on attending religious services for those in administrative segregation are rationally related to a legitimate penological interest.

In Stocking v. Semple, 2016 Conn. Super. LEXIS 2210 (CT Super. Ct., Aug. 10, 2016), a Connecticut state trial court dismissed an inmate's complaint that he was continually denied access to religious services.

In Aiello v. West, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124739 (WD WI, Sept. 14, 2016), a Wisconsin federal district court allowed a Jewish inmate to move forward with his RLUIPA challenge to the ban on inmate-led group religious services, but dismissed plaintiff's 1st Amendment challenge to that ban as well as his challenges relating to availability of ritual foods for the Passover seder and to changes in the kosher meal menu.

In Munson v. Butler, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124817 (SD IL, Sept. 13, 2016), an Illinois federal district court dismissed a Buddhist inmate's complaint that he was not able to receive a low soy lacto-ovo vegetarian diet.

In Beamon v. Dittmann, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124879 (ED WI, Sept. 14, 2016), a Wisconsin federal district court upheld a prison's ban on Nations of Gods and Earths material despite plaintiff's claim that his beliefs were derived from various religious traditions.

In Salgado v. NYS Department of Corrections & Community Supervision, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126659 (WD NY, Sept. 14, 2016), a New York federal magistrate judge recommended that a Muslim inmate be allowed to proceed with his complaint that he was not allowed to wear his Dihk'r prayer beads outside of his cell.

Inmate Has Broader Damage Remedy Under RFRA Than Under RLUIPA

In Crowder v. Lariva, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122966 (SD IN, Sept. 12, 2016), an Indiana federal district court permitted a Hebrew Israelite inmate to move ahead against one of the prison chaplains on his complaint that he was denied a kosher diet. Because plaintiff was a federal inmate, he sued (in addition to his 1st Amendment claim) under RFRA instead of RLUIPA, and the court held that he had broader remedies as a result:

Jones [the chaplain] also argues that because the Seventh Circuit in Nelson v. Miller, 570 F.3d 868, 887 (7th Cir. 2009), held that the similarly-worded RLUIPA does not allow for the collection of money damages against individuals, the same reasoning should apply to RFRA. But there are at least two important differences between RLUIPA and RFRA that compel a different conclusion. First, ... the statutory language of RFRA defines "government" as, among other things, an "official (or other person acting under color of law)." ...Congress thus envisioned at least some individual-capacity suits under RFRA.... Second, RFRA, which applies to federal action, and RLUIPA, which is applicable to state action, arise from different principles.,,, [T]he portion of RFRA that authorizes lawsuits against the states was held unconstitutional because such an application exceeded Congress's power under the Enforcement Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment in City of Boerne v. Flores.... RLUIPA was enacted in response to City of Boerne ... as an exercise of Congress's spending power[.] ...[I]nterpreting that statute to allow damages actions against state officials in their individual capacities would 'raise serious questions regarding whether Congress had exceeded its [constitutional] authority.'" ... [S]uch considerations are not at issue when applying RFRA because RFRA's application to federal action is not based on the Spending Clause.... For these reasons, the Court concludes that RFRA does allow for the recovery of monetary damages against officers in their individual capacities

Federal Court Dissolves TRO Against Native American Pipeline Demonstrators

According to a National Lawyers Guild press release, yesterday a North Dakota federal district court dissolved an ex parte temporary restraining order it had issued a month earlier against the Standing Rock Sioux Tribal Chairman and others who had participated in demonstrations against construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline.  Demonstrators claim that the pipeline corridor runs through and near many Lakota/ Dakota tribe sacred burial and historical sites. Last week a D.C. federal district court refused to enjoin construction of the pipeline, but federal agencies are considering whether or not to grant permits for the project. (See prior posting.) The effect of yesterday's the order is to leave dealing with demonstrations to local officials.

Happy Constitution Day!

Tomorrow is Constitution Day-- the 229th anniversary of the signing of the Constitution by the delegates to the Constitutional Convention. In many cities the event was celebrated today instead of on the weekend.  Of course the primary protections for religious liberty were not part of the document as signed in 1787, but instead were part of the First Amendment-- ratified two years later in 1789.  However the original body of the Constitution did contain some protection for religious liberty and religious pluralism through the provision in Article VI:

[N]o religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

Happy Constitution Day!

Defendant Wears Religious Texts As Protest Against Judge

The New York Post reports (with accompanying photos) that on Wednesday a defendant charged with various drug offenses appeared in a Brooklyn, New York trial court wearing a shirt he had made from newsprint carrying Hebrew writings of the late Lubavitcher Rebbe. He also wore a paper hat carrying seven of the Ten Commandments.  Defendant Aaron Akaberi-- who has professed a series of different religious beliefs-- says he did this as a protest against the judge who had refused to allow him to read passages from Jewish texts into the record at an earlier pre-trial hearing. His hearing was adjourned to a later date.

Voyeuristic Rabbi's 6+ Year Sentence Upheld On Appeal

In Freundel v. United States, (DC Ct. App., Sept. 15, 2016), the D.C. Court of Appeals upheld the trial court's sentence totaling over 6 years in prison imposed on Rabbi Barry Freundel who, under a plea agreement, pleaded guilty to 52 counts of voyeurism. Freundel had secretly videotaped 150 women in the changing room of the mikveh (ritual bath) at Washington's Kesher Israel Synagogue. The trial court sentenced Freundel to consecutive 45-day sentences on each count. On appeal, Fruendel argued that the consecutive sentences violate the double jeopardy clause, contending that his offenses involved only a single course of conduct. The appeals court disagreed, saying in part:

Under Mr. Freundel’s interpretation, once a defendant unlawfully recorded one victim, all future voyeuristic recording, even of different victims with different recording devices in different locations and at different times, would not be separately punishable as long as the defendant in some sense had a single voyeuristic purpose....“This is surely not a result which the legislature intended.”

AP reports on the decision. [Thanks to Tom Rutledge for the lead.]

Brooklyn District Elects First Hasidic Female Judge In New York

The Windsor Terrace Patch reports that Rachel Freier will become the first Hasidic Jewish woman elected as a judge in New York state.  Frier won 41% of the votes in a 3-way Democratic primary for 5th District Civil Court in Kings County.  The district encompasses various communities in Brooklyn.  Apparently Freier will be unopposed in the November election.  Freier, a mother of six and and attorney, is particularly known for her role in founding Ezras Nashim, an all-female volunteer EMT service for the observant Jewish community.

Salesperson Is Independent Contractor, So Title VII Does Not Apply

The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reported yesterday that a Pennsylvania federal district court has dismissed a suit against a bathroom remodeling company brought by a woman who was fired from her sales position when she refused to continue to attend Bible-based sales training sessions.  A federal court jury Tuesday concluded that the plaintiff was an independent contractor rather than employee, so the religious discrimination provisions of Title VII and state law do not apply.

Court Upholds Modified Version of School's Annual Christmas Production

In Freedom From Religion Foundation v. Concord Community Schools, (ND IN, Sept. 14, 2016), an Indiana federal district court upheld against an Establishment Clause attack a modified version of the annual Christmas Spectacular put on by an Indiana high school. The court had previously issued a preliminary injunction against the 2014 and proposed 2015 versions that included a live Nativity Scene. (See prior posting.) The court now ordered the parties to submit briefs as to whether claims regarding those versions are now moot, and if they are not, what remedies are appropriate. The court then concluded that the version of the Christmas Spectacular actually performed in 2015 after the issuance of the preliminary injunction-- a version that modifies the nativity scene and adds Chanukah and Kwanzaa elements-- does not violate any of the Establishment Clause tests.  The court said in part:

At bottom, the endorsement test involves a holistic, qualitative assessment of the totality of the circumstances of a given display. Here, based on the circumstances and presentation of the show as a whole, and the way in which an objective, reasonable observer would likely perceive it, the Court finds that the Christmas Spectacular that was actually performed in 2015 did not convey a message of endorsement of religion.

An FFRF press release, which contains links to prior pleadings in the case, discusses yesterday's decision.

US Civil Rights Commission Issues Report On Religious Liberty vs. Civil Rights

Last week (Sept. 7), the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights released a 306-page briefing report titled Peaceful Coexistence: Reconciling Nondiscrimination Principles with Civil Liberties.  Here is a portion of the Commission's Findings:

The Commission endorses the briefing panelists’ statements as summarized at page 21 of the Report in support of these Findings.

(1) schools must be allowed to insist on inclusive values; 2) throughout history, religious doctrines accepted at one time later become viewed as discriminatory, with religions changing accordingly; 3) without exemptions, groups would not use the pretext of religious doctrines to discriminate; 4) a doctrine that distinguishes between beliefs (which should be protected) and conduct (which should conform to the law) is fairer and easier to apply; 5) third parties, such as employees, should not be forced to live under the religious doctrines of their employers [unless the employer is allowed to impose such constraints by virtue of the ministerial exception]; 6) a basic [civil] right as important as the freedom to marry should not be subject to religious beliefs; and 7) even a widely accepted doctrine such as the ministerial exemption should be subject to review as to whether church employees have religious duties.

Further, specifically with regard to number (2) above, religious doctrines that were widely accepted at one time came to be deemed highly discriminatory, such as slavery, homosexuality bans, and unequal treatment of women, and that what is considered within the purview of religious autonomy at one time would likely change.

Yesterday, the U.S. Catholic Bishop's Ad Hoc Committee on Religious Liberty released a statement (full text) highly critical of the statement in the Report by Commission Chairman Martin Castro.  The Bishops said in part:

For the current Chairman of the United States Commission on Civil Rights, religious liberty is reduced to "nothing except hypocrisy," and religion is being used as a "weapon… by those seeking to deny others equality." He makes the shocking suggestion that Catholic, evangelical, orthodox Jewish, Mormon, and Muslim communities are comparable to fringe segregationists from the civil rights era. These statements painting those who support religious freedom with the broad brush of bigotry are reckless and reveal a profound disregard for the religious foundations of his own work.

[Thanks to Jeff Ziegler for the lead.]

NYT: Russia Uses Orthodox Church To Extend Its Political Influence

The New York Times, in a front-page story posted online yesterday, explores how Russia is using the Russian Orthodox Church to extend the country's political influence.  Here is an excerpt:

While tanks and artillery have been Russia’s weapons of choice to project its power into neighboring Ukraine and Georgia, Mr. Putin has also mobilized faith to expand the country’s reach and influence. A fervent foe of homosexuality and any attempt to put individual rights above those of family, community or nation, the Russian Orthodox Church helps project Russia as the natural ally of all those who pine for a more secure, illiberal world free from the tradition-crushing rush of globalization, multiculturalism and women’s and gay rights.

Thanks to a close alliance between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Kremlin, religion has proved a particularly powerful tool in former Soviet lands like Moldova, where senior priests loyal to the Moscow church hierarchy have campaigned tirelessly to block their country’s integration with the West. Priests in Montenegro, meanwhile have spearheaded efforts to derail their country’s plans to join NATO.

But faith has also helped Mr. Putin amplify Russia’s voice farther west, with the church leading a push into resolutely secular members of the European Union like France.

Catholic Diocese and Franciscan Order Settle Abuse Lawsuits

AP reported yesterday that the Catholic Diocese of Youngstown, Ohio and a Franciscan order based in Hollidaysburg, Pennsylvania have agreed to pay $900,000 to settle lawsuits involving 28 claims of abuse committed by a now deceased Brother in the order, Joseph Baker.  The abuse occurred in Catholic schools in Warren, Ohio between 1986 and 1990. Baker committed suicide in 2013.

Indiana's Bar On Name Changes By Non-Citizens Challenged As Violating Transgender Rights

Yesterday the battle over transgender rights-- which has often had religious overtones-- took a different turn with the filing of a federal court lawsuit by a transgender male from Mexico who was granted political asylum in the United States and who lives in Indiana.  At issue is an Indiana law that prohibits non-citizens from obtaining a legal change of name. The complaint (full text) in Doe v. Pence, (SD IN, filed 9/13/2016), contends that the law violates plaintiff's 1st and 14th Amendment rights, saying in part:

For a transgender person, a change of name is in many cases a necessary part of treatment for Gender Dysphoria....  Transgender people face a heightened risk of discrimination, harassment, and violence when their transgender status is known to others. Being referred to by or having to identify oneself by a name traditionally associated with the person’s sex assigned at birth, rather than with the person’s lived gender, can “out” a transgender person to others, revealing their private medical information and putting them at serious risk of harm.

Plaintiff asserts, in in addition to equal protection, autonomy and privacy claims, a free speech right to change his name:

Indiana Code Section 34-28-2-2.5(a)(5) violates the First Amendment right to freedom of speech by compelling speech from Plaintiff that betrays and falsely communicates the core of who he is.... For transgender persons, communicating their name and expressing their gender is speech protected by the First Amendment. Plaintiff’s adoption of the traditionally masculine name “John” conveys the message that he is a man, an essential component of personal identity.

MALDEF issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit. Wall Street Journal reports on the lawsuit.

Social Security Employee Fighting LGBTQ Awareness Training On Religious Grounds

A new controversy pitting Christian religious beliefs against LGBTQ rights has erupted at the Social Security Administration.  LGBTQ Nation reports today that David Hall, a 14-year employee at the Social Security office in Champaign, Illinois, has been suspended for two days and anticipates being fired for refusing to watch a training video on LGBTQ awareness.  Hall, a Christian, was refused a religious accommodation to excuse him from the requirement to sign a form acknowledging that he had completed the awareness training.  Hall, who has hired a lawyer, says: "I am not going to certify sin." He argues that the video is "promoting an agenda and lifestyle" that he does not agree with. Hall says he has LGBTQ friends and family and is not judging anyone.  He says: "I’m simply trying to live out my life, my faith and be obedient to the will of God."

Speeches To Value Voters Summit Now Online

The annual Value Voters Summit was held last week in Washington, D.C.  Videos of speeches by more than 25 political and religious leaders to the conservative Christian attendees at the Summit are available online.  Speakers included Donald Trump, Mike Pence, Reince Priebus, Oliver North and Rick Santorum.

Cert Petition Filed In "Sister Wives" Challenge To Polygamy Law

A petition for certiorari (full text) was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday in Brown v. Buhman.  In the case, U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed on mootness grounds the constitutional challenge to Utah's bigamy law that had been filed by the polygamous family from the television show "Sister Wives." (See prior posting). A federal district court had held most of Utah's plural marriage ban unconstitutional. (See prior posting.) Jonathan Turley who represents petitioners discusses the filing on his blog.

Title VII's Religious Organization Exemption Protects Salvation Army

In Garcia v. Salvation Army, (D AZ, Sept. 12, 2016), an Arizona federal district court dismissed a Title VII religious discrimination claim brought against the Salvation Army by a former social services coordinator for the organization.  Plaintiff claimed that she was subjected to discrimination, retaliation, and hostile work environment after she stopped attending services at the Salvation Army’s Estrella Mountain Corps where she was employed.  The court held that Title VII's religious organization exemption applies to plaintiff's claim, and that the Salvation Army did not waive the defense by failing to assert it as an affirmative defense.

2nd Circuit: Students Lack Standing To Challenge Diversion of Dollars To Religious Schools

In Montesa v. Schwartz, (2d Cir., Sept. 12, 2016), the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 decision, held that plaintiffs-- dozens of students in the East Ramapo Central School District in New York state-- lack standing to sue over funds allegedly diverted by the school board to Orthodox Jewish schools.  The students claim that the diversion-- in part through manipulation of payments under the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act-- led to less funding for the public schools they attend.  In denying standing, the majority said in part:

We have not found a case ... where an appeals court has recognized [plaintiffs'] theory of direct exposure—where the plaintiffs’ exposure is the loss of a favored governmental service or benefit caused, in part, by a diversion of public resources away from such service or benefit to support a preferred religion....  The Student‐Plaintiffs’ injury arises out of being enmeshed in an underfunded school system, not out of being directly exposed to the alleged unconstitutional IDEA Settlements themselves. An alleged causal connection between the underfunding of the school district’s budget and the alleged unconstitutional expenditures is insufficient to give rise to a direct injury. To hold otherwise would impermissibly expand the concept of direct exposure to include injuries that are unrelated to the challenged governmental act but which flow in fact from a government’s decision to fund one program or service at the expense of another.  This is a theory of indirect injury and recognizing it would allow plaintiffs who are only incidentally affected by a challenged governmental expenditure to assert Establishment Clause claims.

Judge Reiss dissented. Courthouse News Service reports on the decision.

Canadian Appeals Court Allows Review of Church's Expulsion of a Member

In Wall v Judicial Committee of the Highwood Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses, (Alberta Ct. App., Sept. 8, 2016), the Court of Appeals of the Canadian province of Alberta held, in a 2-1 decision, that Canadian civil courts have jurisdiction to review a formal decision by a Jehovah's Witness congregation to disfellowship one of its members. The congregation's Judicial Committee took the action against the member, Randy Wall, on the basis of charges of drunkeness.  A church Appeal Committee upheld the decision over Wall's defense that his action resulted from stress over the church's previous disfellowshipping of his 15 year old daughter and the requirement that he shun aspects of his relationship with her.

The majority held that civil courts have jurisdiction to review the decision of a religious organization where the decision impacts property or civil rights, or if a breach of the rules of natural justice is alleged.  Here Wall alleged sufficient procedural irregularities to give jurisdiction to determine if rules of natural justice were breached.  The appeals court majority also held that Wall can submit new evidence to the trial court on whether the impact of shunning by fellow congregants will result in an economic impact on his real estate business.

Judge Wakeling dissenting said in part:

Relying on basic constitutional principles, I have concluded that, presumptively, religious associations – and more importantly, the constituent members – have the constitutional right to select their own members – those with whom they will worship. This decision to exclude a person from the group may be attributable to irreconcilable religious differences or perceived unacceptable forms of behaviour. One should not have to undertake such an intensely personal pursuit with those with whom they do not wish to associate. A religious association must be solely responsible for this class of decisions.

A civil court must decline to review membership decisions of a religious association....

[S]tate intervention in the affairs of religious organizations is not only contrary to the interests of a democratic community, it is also inimical to the welfare of both religious organizations and their congregants.  Whether a religion prospers and attracts new members and has influence in the greater community should be the product of the efforts of adherents of a religion and the values of the religion, not the level of support provided by state apparatus, including the judicial branch of government.

... Courts have neither the mandate nor the expertise to resolve religious doctrinal disputes.

Where one appellate judge dissents on an issue of law, an appeal as of right to Canada's Supreme Court is available. (Background.)  National Post reports on the decision.

Company Settles With EEOC Over Firing of Seventh Day Adventist

The EEOC announced last week that North Carolina-based Greenville Ready Mixed Concrete, Inc., has agreed to a $42,500 settlement in the EEOC's suit (see prior posting) against it for firing a Seventh Day Adventist employee who refused a Saturday work assignment. The company has also agreed to a 5-year consent decree requiring it to create an anti-discrimination policy, engage in employee training, post notice about the lawsuit and submit periodic reports to the EEOC.

Illinois Court Recognizes Muslim Divorce In India Through Khula

Times of India reported yesterday on a June 28 opinion handed down by a Cook County, Illinois circuit court judge recognizing that a Muslim woman's first marriage had been validly dissolved in India in 2007 through the little-known wife-initiated Sharia law procedure of khula.  The issue arose when the woman's second husband raised as a defense in a divorce proceeding the argument that their marriage was never valid because the wife was never divorced from her first husband.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Steven Menashi, How Great is the Threat to Religious Freedom, Really?, (Mosaic Magazine, August 17, 2015).
• Michael W. McConnell, Mark E. Schneider, Jay P. Lefkowitz & Steven Menashi, Brief of Amici Curiae Former Justice Department Officials in Support of Petitioners in Zubik v. Burwell, (2016).
• Shachar Eldar & Elkana Laist, The Irrelevance of Motive and the Rule of Law, (New Criminal Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Marc O. DeGirolami, Religious Accommodation, Religious Tradition, and Political Polarization, (Lewis & Clark Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Christopher C. Lund, Religious Exemptions, Third-Party Harms, and the Establishment Clause, (Notre Dame Law Review, Vol. 91, p. 1375, 2016 (symposium)).
• John C. Eastman, No Free Lunch, But Dinner and a Movie (and Contraceptives for Dessert)?, (10 N.Y.U. J. L. & Liberty 282 (2016)).
• Robert Corn-Revere, Hate Speech Laws: Ratifying the Assassin's Veto, (Cato Institute Policy Analysis No. 791 (2016)).

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

• Effie Fokas, Directions in Religious Pluralism in Europe: Mobilizations in the Shadow of European Court of Human Rights Religious Freedom Jurisprudence, (Oxford Journal of Law and Religion, Vol 4, No.1, 54-74 (2015)).
• Luke Beck, The Case against Improper Purpose as the Touchstone for Invalidity under Section 116 of the Constitution, (Federal Law Review, Vol. 44, No. 3, Forthcoming).
• Gbohou Gnantin Hilaire Tegnan & Saldi Isra, Rule of Law and Human Rights Challenges in South East Asia: A Case Study of Legal Pluralism in Indonesia, (April 1, 2016).
• Preethi Kumar Mokshagundam, Dr. Ambedkar's Concept of Social Justice and Indian Constitution Protection for Dalits – A Recent Day Analysis, (August 23, 2016).
• Paul Dermine, Towards the Recognition of a Pan-European Right to Same-Sex Marriage – What If Light Came from the United States?, (June 1, 2016).
• Matthew S. Erie, Sharia, Charity, and Minjian Autonomy in Muslim China: Gift Giving in a Plural World, (American Ethnologist 43(2): 311-423 (2016)).

From SmartCILP:

• Walter C. Long, The Constitutionality and Ethics of Execution-Day Prison Chaplaincy, [Abstract], 21 Texas Journal on Civil Liberties & Civil Rights 1-33 (2015).
• Michael Stokes Paulsen, The Unconscionable War on Moral Conscience (reviewing Robert P. George, Conscience and Its Enemies: Confronting the Dogmas of Liberal Secularism), 91 Notre Dame Law Review Rev. 1167-1195 (2016).
• Mark Strasser, Hobby Lobby, RFRA, and Family Burdens, [Abstract], 25 Boston University Public Interest Law Journal 239-264 (2016).
• Special Issue: A Thousand Years of Infamy: The History of the Blood Libel. Edited by Richard H. Weisberg; preface by Richard H. Weisberg; articles by Jeffrey Mehlman, Hannah R. Johnson, Richard H. Weisberg, David Fraser and Vivian Grosswald Curran. 28 Law & Literature 1-95 (2016).

Ethiopia Pardons Muslims Convicted of Opposing Government's Moderate Push

AP reports that in Ethiopia on Saturday, the chief prosecutor pardoned around 1,000 convicts upon the approach of the Ethiopian New Year and Eid al-Adha.  Among them were 135 Muslims convicted on anti-terrorism charges of religious extremism.  The pardoned convicts had participated in months-long anti-government protests in 2012 when the government encouraged the teaching of the moderate Al-Ahbash form of Islam and required that it be taught in an Addis Ababa religious school. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Begnoche v. Derose, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119747 (MD PA, Sept. 2, 2016), a Pennsylvania federal district court dismissed an inmate's claim that the Therapeutic Community program involved religious content and interfered with his ability to practice his Native American religious beliefs.

In Shakur v. Thomas, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119767 (ND NY, Sept. 6, 2016), a New York federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72707, June 2, 2016)(see prior posting), finding a plausible showing that an inmate's position as a Muslim Shia inmate facilitator is protected 1st Amendment speech or conduct for purposes of a retaliation claim. The court also adopted uncontested recommendations that plaintiff be allowed to move ahead with various claims of denial of Ramadan and festival meals and participation in congregational prayer.

In Espinosa v. Stogner, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120646 (D NV, Sept. 6, 2016), a Nevada federal district court dismissed an inmate's complaint that prison authorities violated the Free Exercise and Establishment clauses by refusing to recognize his "secular/religious Humanism" as an accepted faith group. However the court granted plaintiff leave to amend his complaint to allege "how his brand of humanism differs from tradition secular moral philosophy in a way sufficient to qualify as a religion under the Free Exercise Clause."

In Wilson v. Avertest, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121593 (MD PA, Sept. 7, 2016), a Pennsylvania federal magistrate judge recommended dismissal of free exercise and 4th Amendment complaints by plaintiff who under a house arrest and alcohol monitoring program was required to undergo a below-the-waist strip search.  Plaintiff claimed that his Jewish faith requires that he "not to bare his nakedness for any unnecessary reason."

In Wilkes v. Hunter, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121707 (ND CA, Sept. 8, 2016), a California federal district court dismissed, with leave to amend, plaintiff's claim that jail deputies refused to allow him to bring a Christian cross into jail.

In Brown v. Mohr, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122292 (SD OH, Sept. 9, 2016), an Ohio federal magistrate judge recommended refusing to dismiss a Jewish inmate's claim that he was denied a kosher diet for 10 weeks, but recommended dismissing his complaint that he was housed in a cell with a neo-Nazi inmate.

Court Rejects Sioux Challenge To Pipeline On Sacred Land, But Feds Delay Permission

In Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, (D DC Sept. 9, 2016), the D.C. federal district court refused to enjoin construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline near the Standing Rock Indian Reservation on sacred ancestral lands of the Sioux Tribe. (See prior related posting.) Summarizing its 58-page decision, the court said:

The Tribe fears that construction of the pipeline, which runs within half a mile of its reservation in North and South Dakota, will destroy sites of cultural and historical significance. It has now filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction, asserting principally that the Corps flouted its duty to engage in tribal consultations under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and that irreparable harm will ensue. After digging through a substantial record on an expedited basis, the Court cannot concur. It concludes that the Corps has likely complied with the NHPA and that the Tribe has not shown it will suffer injury that would be prevented by any injunction the Court could issue.

However, shortly after the decision was handed down, the Department of Justice, the Department of the Army and the Department of the Interior issued a joint statement (full text) reading in part:

The Army will not authorize constructing the Dakota Access pipeline on Corps land bordering or under Lake Oahe until it can determine whether it will need to reconsider any of its previous decisions regarding the Lake Oahe site under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or other federal laws.  Therefore, construction of the pipeline on Army Corps land bordering or under Lake Oahe will not go forward at this time.  The Army will move expeditiously to make this determination, as everyone involved — including the pipeline company and its workers — deserves a clear and timely resolution.  In the interim, we request that the pipeline company voluntarily pause all construction activity within 20 miles east or west of Lake Oahe.

Furthermore, this case has highlighted the need for a serious discussion on whether there should be nationwide reform with respect to considering tribes’ views on these types of infrastructure projects.  Therefore, this fall, we will invite tribes to formal, government-to-government consultations on two questions:  (1) within the existing statutory framework, what should the federal government do to better ensure meaningful tribal input into infrastructure-related reviews and decisions and the protection of tribal lands, resources, and treaty rights; and (2) should new legislation be proposed to Congress to alter that statutory framework and promote those goals....

In recent days, we have seen thousands of demonstrators come together peacefully, with support from scores of sovereign tribal governments, to exercise their First Amendment rights and to voice heartfelt concerns about the environment and historic, sacred sites.  It is now incumbent on all of us to develop a path forward that serves the broadest public interest.

CNN reports on developments.

Settlement Ends Long-Running Dispute Over Control of Sikh Temple In California

A long-running dispute over control of a Sikh Temple in Yuba City, California, appears to have come to an end after a court-ordered election of new board members resulted in a cooperative transition of leadership.  According to yesterday's Appeal-Democrat, the election (ordered by the court to be held without regard to the Temple by-laws quorum requirements) led to victory by a slate of 73-board members who were opposed to the incumbent directors. The parties then entered a settlement agreement covering all four of the pending cases growing out of the controversy. The agreement was presented to the court yesterday.  Under the settlement, the new directors take office immediately and they will amend the Temple's bylaws to reduce from 8 to 4 years the term of board members. During a board meeting yesterday evening, the new board received the keys and financial records of the Temple.

Another Suit Challenges Feds' Interpretation Of Title IX To Protect Transgender Rights

On Wednesday, another lawsuit was filed-- this time by a group of Minnesota parents-- challenging the Department of Education and Department of Justice's recent Guidance declaring that Title IX protects transgender students from discrimination and requires that they be permitted to use restrooms and locker rooms consistent with their gender identity. The complaint (full text) in Privacy Matters v. U.S. Department of Education, (D MN, filed 9/7/2016) contends that the Guidance violates the Administrative Procedure Act, Title IX, the right to privacy and to control the upbringing of one's children.  It also contends that the Guidance infringes plaintiffs' religious free exercise rights under the state and federal constitutions and RFRA, saying:

Some Student Plaintiffs have a sincere religious belief that they must practice modesty, which includes a requirement that they not undress or use the restroom with the opposite sex.

Some Parent Plaintiffs have a sincere religious belief that they must teach their children to practice modesty and protect the modesty of their children. This includes a requirement that their children not undress or use the restroom with the opposite sex.

ADF issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

Muslim Police Officer Sues For Religious Accommodation

A Muslim police officer in the Town of West New York, NJ, filed a religious discrimination lawsuit this week in New Jersey federal district court alleging that he was not provided a religious accommodation to the police department's Appearance Policy.  The complaint (full text) in Awadallah v. Town of West New York, (D NJ, filed 9/7/2016), alleges that plaintiff wears a light beard as part of his Muslim religious beliefs. It contends that defendants initially denied the possibility of an accommodation and then delayed action on his request.  He was not permitted to work overtime while he was wearing his beard, and was required to submit proof of his religious beliefs. Ultimately his accommodation request was denied. Plaintiff alleges this violates Title VII and the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination. [Thanks to Jeff Pasek for the lead.]

6th Circuit Dismisses Suit Over Catholic Bishops' Health Care Directives

In Means v. U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, (6th Cir., Sept. 8, 2016), the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a Michigan federal district court's dismissal of a suit against the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and against three individuals who served as chairs of the Catholic Health Ministries-- the sponsor of a health care system that includes the Catholic hospital at which plaintiff Tamesha Means claims she was inadequately treated.  Means visited the hospital when she prematurely went into labor at 18 weeks into her pregnancy.  The hospital, complying with the USCCB's  Catholic health care directives, did not give Means the option of terminating her pregnancy, even though her physician suspected she had a serious bacterial infection that can cause infertility and even death.  After the statute of limitations on medical malpractice had run, Means sued the entities responsible for promulgating and adopting the Catholic health care directives, charging them with negligence.

The 6th Circuit dismissed the USCCB from the case for lack of personal jurisdiction.  As to the other defendants, the court said in part:

Means asks us to recognize a duty under Michigan law on the part of a religious organization to a specific patient to adopt ethical directives that do not contradict the medical standard of care. Whether such a duty exists is far from certain, especially if the standard of care violates the organization’s religious beliefs. Nevertheless, even if the CHM defendants had such a duty, Means’s factual allegations do not create the plausible inference that any breach of that duty proximately caused any injury to Means within the strictures of Michigan negligence law.... 

Means alleges—and we do not doubt—that she suffered physical and mental pain, emotional injuries, a riskier delivery, shock and emotional trauma from making funeral arrangements for her dead child, and other “discomforts and pain.” But these allegations are not sufficient to state an injury under Michigan negligence law. In Michigan, “present physical injury” is necessary to state a claim for negligence.

[Thanks to Tom Rutledge for the lead.] 

Two Charged With Conspiracy In Plan To Coerce Jewish Religious Divorce

On Wednesday, the U.S. Department of Justice announced the filing of a criminal complaint against an Israeli rabbi connected with the Satmar Hasidic community in Kiryas Joel, New York, as well as against a 25-year old Kiryas Joel resident, charging them with conspiracy to commit kidnapping and conspiracy to commit murder for hire.  The plot, revealed to authorities by a confidential source ("CS") who was contacted by the two, started as a planned kidnapping in order to coerce the victim into granting a Jewish religious divorce ("get") to the intended victim's wife.  The plot developed into one of possible murder of the victim.  The criminal complaint (full text) in United States v. Liebowitz, (SD NY, filed 9/6/2016), charges Rabbi Aharon Goldberg and Shimen Liebowitz with advancing over $57,000 to have the plan carried out. JTA reports on the case.

Sioux-- and Green Party Candidate-- Protest North Dakota Pipeline Across Sacred Land

The Washington Post this week reported on the showdown between members of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and the company building the Dakota Access crude-oil pipeline across North and South Dakota.  The tribe claims that the pipeline will run through sacred ancestral lands which were taken from the tribe over the years. It will cross the Missouri River just a mile north of the Standing Rock Indian Reservation.  Thousands of Native Americans have traveled to North Dakota over the past weeks to join the protest. As reported by CBS News, on Tuesday Green Party Presidential candidate Jill Stein visited the protest site and, at the urging of activists, spray painted a  message on a bulldozer blade. In response, yesterday a warrant was issued for Stein's arrest, charging her with misdemeanors-- criminal trespass and criminal mischief.  On Tuesday, a judge issued a temporary restraining order halting construction only on part of the land. A ruling on the Tribe's request for an injunction is expected Friday. (NPR News).

In Canada, Gay Activists Sue Christian Group That Infiltrated Pride Parade

Last month in Canada, two LGBT activists filed a class action lawsuit against a group of Christian conservatives who, calling themselves the "Gay Zombies Cannabis Consumers Association," registered under false pretenses to march in the 2016 Toronto Pride Parade.  According to the complaint (full text) in Hudspeth v. Whatcott, (Ont. Super. Ct., filed 8/11/2016), the Gay Zombies, wearing green costumes that disguised their identities, handed out 3000 flyers showing graphic pictures of sexually transmitted diseases and vilifying homosexuality.  Alleging civil conspiracy, intentional infliction of mental distress, and defamation, the suit seeks an injunction to bar defendants from future participation in or attendance at the Toronto Pride Parade; an order barring them from further distribution of the offensive flyers; and damages totaling $103 million (Canadian). Daily Xtra (Aug. 12) reported on the lawsuit.

Massachusetts Agency Says Transgender Non-Discrimination Can Apply To Some Church Events

Massachusetts Senate Bill 2407, banning discrimination on the basis of gender identity in public accommodations, becomes effective October 1. The bill also requires public accommodations to allow restroom use consistent with a person's gender identity.  Last week (Sept. 1), the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination released its Gender Identity Guidance (full text) setting out the Commission's interpretation of the new law. The Guidance suggests that in some situations, the anti-discrimination ban can apply to churches:

Under G.L. c. 272, § 98, places of public accommodation may not discriminate against, or restrict a person from services because of that person’s gender identity. For example, a hotel or motel may not refuse to book a room for a person because of the person’s gender identity. Even a church could be seen as a place of public accommodation if it holds a secular event, such as a spaghetti supper, that is open to the general public.

The Guidance adds in a footnote: "All charges, including those involving religious institutions or religious exemptions, are reviewed on a case-by-case basis." The Guidance also provides: "In the limited circumstances where it is necessary, an individual’s gender identity may be demonstrated by any evidence that the gender identity is sincerely held as a part of the person’s core identity."  Daily Caller reports on the Guidance.

Suit Says Arizona Charter School Teaches Religious Curriculum

Yesterday Americans United filed a federal court lawsuit alleging that an Arizona public charter school teaches a religiously-based required American Government course, and interjects religion in a number of other parts of its curriculum. The complaint (full text) in Doe v. Heritage Academy, Inc., (D AZ, filed 9/7/2016), alleges that the taxpayer-funded charter school with three campuses in Arizona violates the Establishment Clause as well as the Arizona constitution by providing religious education to its students.  The required American Government class is taught by the school's founder and principal, Earl Taylor, Jr., and uses materials from the National Center for Constitutional Studies-- an organization founded by Taylor. The complaint alleges in part:

In class, Taylor teaches the students that the Ten Commandments — including those that mandate worship of God — must be obeyed in order to attain happiness; that socialism violates God’s laws; and that true patriots believe in the “universal religion of all mankind,” the tenets of which ...  incorporate the beliefs of some Christian denominations.

AU issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit. [Thanks to Jeff Pasek for the lead.]

Challenge To Church Governance Matters Dismissed On Ecclesiastical Abstention Grounds

In Azige v. Holy Trinity Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahdo Church, (NC App., Sept. 6, 2016), a North Carolina state appellate court dismissed on ecclesiastical abstention grounds a lawsuit by a faction of church members alleging that the church bylaws had been violated in extending the terms of certain parish council members and in taking other actions.  The court said in part:

Although plaintiffs seek to present this dispute as a simple procedural disagreement over the adoption of bylaws in accord with proper procedure, the substance of the complaint belies this claim. The amended complaint alleges that each plaintiff is “a registered member” of the church; defendants dispute their membership....

Membership in a church is a core ecclesiastical matter. The power to control church membership is ultimately the power to control the church. It is an area where the courts of this State should not become involved.... 

The issues before us would require interpretation of the bylaws which do impose doctrinal requirements. Even if a declaration of plaintiffs’ status as registered members is not specifically the issue before us, in order to determine if plaintiffs even have standing to bring the other issues or to determine if the correct number of members voted for the challenged amendments, the trial court would need to address the contested membership status...

Obama Nominates First Muslim Federal Court Judge

As reported by National Law Journal, yesterday President Obama nominated (White House announcement) Abid Qureshi, partner in the D.C. law firm of Latham & Watkins, for a federal district judgeship in the District of Columbia.  Qureshi, a Harvard Law School graduate, is the first Muslim ever nominated for a seat on a federal court. A litigator whose expertise includes white collar defense, Qureshi is also the global Chair of Latham’s Pro Bono Committee. (Bio). Muslim Advocates issued a press release commending President Obama for the nomination.

Israel's Supreme Court OK's Sabbath Rail Line Repairs

Yesterday Israel's Supreme Court sitting as the High Court of Justice stepped into the government's political battle over whether planned repairs to the country's commuter rail lines can take place on Saturdays, the Jewish Sabbath.  As reported by JTA, last week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu canceled permits issued by Transportation Minister (and political rival) Yisrael Katz that allowed the work to proceed on the Sabbath.  Katz's permits led the ultra-Orthodox parties (part of Netanyahu's coalition government) to threaten to bring down the government. Netanyahu's intervention meant that the repair work did not pick up until Saturday night and this led to traffic jams and stranded commuters on Sunday (a workday in Israel).

Following this, a left-wing lawmaker (Meretz party) filed a petition with Israel's Supreme Court seeking to get the Sabbath repairs to move ahead.  As reported by The Forward and Arutz Sheva, yesterday the Court issued an interim order barring Netanyahu from stopping urgent Saturday work.  According to the Court, the Railway Authority has been issued a permit allowing Saturday work during the entire month of September, and only the Labor Minister has authority to revoke the permit.  A special Knesset session to discuss the matter has been postponed until September 19, so that Arab members of the Knesset who will be celebrating Eid Al-Adha the week before will be able to attend.

Obama Speaks To Laotians On Human Rights and Religious Liberty

Yesterday, as part of his trip to Laos, President Obama delivered an address (full text) to the people of the country. Speaking at the Lao National Cultural Hall in Vientiane, his remarks included references both to Laos' religious and cultural heritage and to America's views on human rights:

... [I]n countless stupas and in your daily lives, we see the strength that draws -- so many of you from your Buddhist faith -- a faith that tells you that you have a moral duty to each other, to live with kindness and honesty, and that we can help end suffering if we embrace the right mindset and the right actions.  And in literature like the epic of Sinxay, we see the values that define the people of Laos, which is modesty and compassion, and resilience and hope....

I believe that nations are stronger and more successful when they uphold human rights.  We speak out for these rights not because we think our own country is perfect -- no nation is -- not because we think every country should do as we do, because each nation has to follow its own path.  But we will speak up on behalf of human rights because we believe they are the birthright of every human being.  And we know that democracy can flourish in Asia because we’ve seen it thrive from Japan and South Korea to Taiwan. 

Across this region, we see citizens reaching to shape their own futures.  And freedom of speech and assembly, and the right to organize peacefully in civil society without harassment or fear of arrest or disappearing we think makes a country stronger.  A free press that can expose abuse and injustice makes a country stronger.  And access to information and an open Internet where people can learn and share ideas makes a country stronger.  An independent judiciary that upholds the rule of law, and free and fair elections so that citizens can choose their own leaders -- these are all the rights that we seek for all people.

We believe that societies are more stable and just when they recognize the inherent dignity of every human being -- the dignity of being able to live and pray as you choose, so that Muslims know they are a part of Myanmar’s future, and Christians and Buddhists have the right to worship freely in China.  The dignity of being treated equally under the law, so that no matter where you come from or who you love or what you look like you are respected.  And the dignity of a healthy life -- because no child should ever die from hunger or a mosquito bite, or the poison of dirty water.  This is the justice that we seek in the world.

NYT: Peale Had Religious Influence on Trump

The New York Times yesterday reports on the influence of New York City's Marble Collegiate Church and its former leader, Dr. Norman Vincent Peale, on Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump.

Firing of Employee For Anointing Office With Oil Is Upheld

In Cheeley v. City of Miami, (SD FL, Aug. 10, 2016), a Florida federal district court dismissed a Title VII religious discrimination claim brought by an employee in Miami's Capital Improvements Program department.  Eric Cheeley was fired after he admitted that he had applied an oily liquid in the shape of crosses on walls, cubicles and doorways-- anointing various areas in order to bless the department. He contended that the city should have accommodated his sincerely held religious belief that he needed to anoint the office. The court concluded, however, that:

Cheeley has not presented sufficient evidence to permit a reasonable juror to find that the City could have accommodated Cheeley’s religious beliefs without undue hardship.

Yesterday's Christian Post reported on the decision.

Winery Says Zoning Restrictions On Outdoor Weddings Violate RLUIPA and Speech Rights

The Ventura County Star reported yesterday on a lawsuit filed in a California federal district court by a southern California winery challenging a Ventura County ordinance that requires conditional use permits for outdoor events, including weddings.  Six months ago the county denied Epona Estate's application for a permit to allow weddings, charitable fundraisers, luncheons and similar events at the winery.  The suit contends that the restriction on outdoor weddings violates the winery's free speech rights as well as its rights under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act.

Iran's Supreme Leader Questions Saudi Control of Hajj

According to today's Jerusalem Post, Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has questioned Saudi Arabia's continued control of the hajj  pilgrimage.  Last year over 2000 pilgrims, many of them Iranians, died in a crush of crowds outside Mecca. (See prior posting.) Iran is a regional rival of Saudi Arabia, and this year talks on arrangement for Iranians to make the hajj broke down.  No Iranians will attend this year. (See prior posting.)  A message on Khamenei's website reads:

Because of these (Saudi) rulers' oppressive behavior towards God's guests (pilgrims), the world of Islam must fundamentally reconsider the management of the two holy places and the issue of haj.

The hajj is projected to begin on September 9.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Marjorie A. Silver, Preface and Introduction: Transforming Justice, Lawyers and the Practice of Law, (Carolina Academic Press, 2016, Forthcoming).
• Adam Shinar, Religion and the Construction of the Urban Landscape, (Private Communities and Urban Governance 215 (Amnon Lehavi ed., Springer, 2016)).
• Mohammed Dejen Assen, Contested Secularism in Ethiopia: The Contention between Muslims and the Government, (May 26, 2016).
• Ira C. Lupu & Robert W. Tuttle, The Mystery of Unanimity in Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & School v. EEOC, (Forthcoming, 20 Lewis & Clark L. Rev, Issue #4, in Symposium, Law and Religion in an Increasingly Polarized America).
• Paula A. Monopoli, Inheritance Law and the Marital Presumption after Obergefell, (8 Estate Planning & Community Property Law Journal 437 (2016)).
• Iginio Gagliardone, et.al., Mechachal: Online Debates and Elections in Ethiopia - From Hate Speech to Engagement in Social Media, (May 1, 2016).
• Ji Ma & Sara Konrath, Thirty Years of Nonprofit Research: Scaling the Knowledge of the Field 1986-2015, (September 2, 2016).

From SmartCILP:

• Amy Barrow, Contested Spaces During Transition: Regime Change in Myanmar and Its Implications for Women, 22 Cardozo Journal of Law & Gender 75-108 (2015).

Note To Readers: Comment Feature Disabled

This summer, Religion Clause has been inundated with Comments from spammers, and to a lesser extent, from trollers.  Therefore I have joined the trend among serious websites and have reluctantly disabled the Comment feature on this blog.  I invite readers who have corrections or fairness concerns relating to any post to communicate with me by e-mail at the link in the sidebar, or via Twitter.  And I thank those readers who have in the past posted serious and substantive comments.--- HMF

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Quick v. Annucci, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115217 (ND NY, Aug. 29, 2016) a New York federal district court allowed a Muslim inmate to move ahead against the prison superintendent with his complaint that he was denied the cold alternative diet and was told it was only available to Jewish inmates.

In Lindh v. Warden, Federal Correctional Institution, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116243 (SD IN, Aug. 30, 2016), an Indiana federal district court enjoined a federal prison under RFRA from conducting a visual strip search of a Muslim inmate as a pre-condition for a non-contact visit in the communications management housing unit.

In Meece v. Ballard, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116364 (WD KY, Aug. 30, 2016), a Kentucky federal district court denied a preliminary injunction to a Reform Jewish inmate who claimed his free exercise rights were substantially burdened when he was removed from the kosher diet program for purchasing food inconsistent with Orthodox Jewish kosher rules, but not with Reform Jewish practices for kosher diets.

In Brown v. Clarke, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117017 (WD VA, Aug. 31, 2016), a Virginia federal district court referred to mediation a Muslim inmate's claim that he was wrongly removed from the Common Fare diet for six month.

In Percival v. Stuhler, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117129 (WD MI, Aug. 31, 2016), a Michigan federal district court dismissed an inmate's complaint that he was not allowed to attend group worship while he was in toplock for misconduct.

In Mohammed v. Daniels, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117201 (ED NC, Aug. 31, 2016), a North Carolina federal district court dismissed as unproven a Muslim inmate's claim that he was denied access to his Quran during Ramadan. It also dismissed his complaint that he was not allowed to make a telephone call to the chaplain.

B.L. v. Zong, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117509 (MD PA, Aug. 30, 2016), is a suit by a male inmate charging a female correctional officer with an extensive pattern of sexual predation.  Defendants did not move to dismiss plaintiff's claim that he was forced to engage in sexual activity that violated his religious tenets.  However a Pennsylvania federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing claims against others relating to plaintiff's work assignment that allowed the predation to occur and eventual transfer to another institution that briefly interfered with plaintiff's religious exercise.

In Burley v. Ball, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117971 (WD MI, Sept. 1, 2016), a Michigan federal district court disagreed with a magistrate's recommendation (2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118338, Aug. 12, 2016) and dismissed a Jewish inmate's complaint that the chaplain denied him a transfer to another facility where he could participate in a Passover seder and obtain food that was kosher for Passover.

In Johnson v. Roskosci, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118804 (MD PA, Sept. 2, 2016), a Pennsylvania federal district court allowed an inmate to move ahead with his complaint under the free exercise clause that his religious cultural beads were taken from him because they did not have crosses on them. The court dismissed with leave to amend his retaliation as well as his 8th and 14th Amendment claims.

In Robinson v. Cameron, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119090 (WD PA, Sept. 1, 2016), a Pennsylvania federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing an inmate's complaint that his religious rights are substantially burdened by the requirement that in order to participate in the sex offender program he must admit guilt. Plaintiff says his religious belief is that confession is to be made only to God.

Obama Presses China's Xi On Religious Freedom

President Obama is in China for the Sept. 4-5 G-20 Summit.  (See prior posting.) Today he met with China's President Xi, and the White House released a Readout of the President’s Meeting with President Xi Jinping of China which included the following:

The President reiterated America’s unwavering support for upholding human rights in China and stressed the need for China to protect religious freedom for all of its citizens.

IRS Adopts Final Rules Recognizing Same-Sex Marriages For Tax Purposes

Yesterday the Internal Revenue Service published in the Federal Register a release (full text) adopting final rules recognizing same-sex marriages for federal tax purposes. The new rules provide in part:

[A] marriage of two individuals is recognized for federal tax purposes if the marriage is recognized by the state, possession, or territory of the United States in which the marriage is entered into, regardless of domicile....

Two individuals who enter into a relationship denominated as marriage under the laws of a foreign jurisdiction are recognized as married for federal tax purposes if the relationship would be recognized as marriage under the laws of at least one state, possession, or territory of the United States....

The terms spouse, husband, and wife do not include individuals who have entered into a registered domestic partnership, civil union, or other similar formal relationship not denominated as a marriage under the law of the state, possession, or territory of the United States where such relationship was entered into....

Church's RLUIPA Claim Dismissed, But Defamation Claim Moves Forward

In Riverside Church v. City of St. Michael, (D MN, Aug. 31, 2016), a Minnesota federal district court dismissed a church's RLUIPA and free exercise claims, but allowed the church to proceed on its free speech and defamation claims. A Christian and Missionary Alliance congregation attempted to purchase a building formerly used as a movie theater but could not obtain city zoning approval.  Eventually the city amended its zoning ordinance to allow religious assemblies, among others, in the relevant zoning district.  The Church however sued over the past zoning denials, and over an allegedly false public statement the city made as to why the Church withdrew from negotiations with the city.  In dismissing the Church's RLUIPA claim, the court concluded that neither the substantial burden nor equal terms provisions of the law were violated.  The court also pointed to a less-often used safe-harbor provision in RLUIPA that allows the city to "avoid the pre-emptive force" of the statute by taking action to eliminate the substantial burden imposed by a policy.  In allowing the Church's free speech claim to proceed, the court concluded that questions remained as to whether the ban on religious assemblies in the relevant zoning district was narrowly enough tailored to the city's traffic safety concerns.

President Appoints Delegation To Canonization of Mother Theresa

President Obama yesterday announced the appointment of a delegation to represent the United States at the Canonization ceremony for Mother Teresa in the Vatican on September 4.  The delegation will be headed by Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, Lisa Monaco.  It also includes U.S. Ambassador to the Vatican Kenneth Hackett; National Security Council Executive Secretary Suzy George; CEO of Catholic Charities Sister Donna J. Markham; and CEO of Catholic Relief Services Dr. Carolyn Y. Woo.

Court Refuses To Dismiss Abortion Buffer Zone Challenge, But Denies Preliminary Injunction

In Reilly v. City of Harrisburg, (MD PA, Aug. 31, 2016), a Pennsylvania federal district court refused to grant a preliminary injunction to bar enforcement of a Harrisburg, Pennsylvania ordinance that provides for a 20-foot buffer zone around health care facilities to protect women seeking to access to abortion clinics from picketers and sidewalk counselors.  The court however refused to dismiss some of plaintiffs' challenges to the law.  In particular the court allowed plaintiffs to move ahead with their claims that the ordinance is not narrowly tailored and that it is overbroad.  The court rejected several other challenges including free exercise, vagueness and prior restraint claims.

French Official Proposes New Efforts To Align Muslims With French Secular Values

Al Jazeera reports that in France on Monday, Muslim leaders met with Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve to discuss the future of Islam in the country. The Interior Minister wants to set up three new organizations to help French Muslims align their beliefs with the secular values of France. One of the organizations would focus on integration of the Muslim faith, the second on the building of mosques, and the third on Imams. Imams would be required to use French instead of Arabic for their sermons, and they would need to "understand French values".  The move comes in the wake of new tensions in the country over full-body swim suits worn by Muslim women. (See prior posting.)

U.S. Pressure On China Over Religious Freedom As Obama Heads There For G20

On Sept. 4-5, President Obama will attend the G20 Summit in Hangzhou, China. (Yahoo News).  Yesterday the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom issued a statement (full text) urging the President to raise religious freedom concerns with China's President Xi and asking him to press for the release of prisoners of conscience.  This follows a White House meeting on Tuesday by National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice with Chinese human rights advocates to discuss religious freedom and other human rights issues in China. (White House statement).

Egypt Passes Church Construction Law

Egypt's Parliament yesterday approved a new law governing the building and renovation of Christian churches. 10% of Egypt's population is Coptic Christian.  Reuters reports that the law allows provincial governors (instead of the security services) to approve or deny church building and renovation permits. Coptic Church officials see then new law as progress, but Christian activists would have preferred a unified law governing both mosque and church construction. Restrictions in the new law are still more extensive than those which apply to mosque construction.   In the past, suspected Christian church building has led to sectarian riots.

Suit Charges Discriminatory Application of Driver's License Photo Accommodation

The ACLU yesterday filed a federal lawsuit against the Lee County, Alabama officials in charge of issuing drivers' licenses claiming that they are unconstitutionally administering the state's religious accommodation provision allowing head coverings in license photos.  The complaint (full text) in Allen v. English, (MD AL, filed 8/30/2016, alleges that plaintiff Yvonne Allen is a devout Christian who as part of her religious practice covers her hair with a headscarf.  When Allen requested to wear her head covering for her license photo, officials told her that the religious accommodation for head coverings only applies to Muslims.  The suit alleges that this practice violates the religion clauses of the federal and state constitutions. ACLU issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

FOIA Suit Seeks All State Department Records On Combating Genocide

Yesterday, a conservative civil rights and religious liberty advocacy group filed a lawsuit seeking to enforce its Freedom of Information Act request for all State Department records and communications reflecting efforts to carry out the terms of the Genocide Convention, to hold ISIS accountable for atrocities it has committed, and to respond to the ISIS genocide of Christians.  The complaint (full text) in American Center for Law & Justice v. U.S. Department of State, (D DC, filed 8/30/2016), sets out in 22 paragraphs the scope of the records sought in its July 18 FOIA request sent to the State Department, and adds that the State Department "has a reputation for flaunting and disregarding its public accountability and FOIA obligations." The lawsuit follows actions by ACLJ in recent weeks pressing the United Nations to take action to respond to ISIS genocide against Christians and others.

So Far, 6 Charged Under Russia's New Law Limiting Missionary Activities

As previously reported, in July Russia's President signed into law new anti-terrorism legislation that, among other things, banned preaching, praying, proselytizing, and disseminating religious materials outside of officially-designated locations.  Last week, Forum 18 reported that so far six people have been charged under the new limits on missionary activity. Two Baptists, and a third person merely identified as Protestant, have had fines imposed on them.  A Hare Krishna adherent was acquitted.  Charges against two others-- a Pentecostal and a Seventh Day Adventist-- are still pending.  The Forum 18 posting has extensive details on each case.

Court Issues Narrow Preliminary Injunction Against North Carolina's Transgender Bathroom Access Law

In an 83-page opinion handed down last week, a North Carolina federal district court issued a narrow preliminary injunction preventing enforcement North Carolina's transgender bathroom access law against two students and one employee of the University of North Carolina.  In Carcano v. McCrory, (MD NC, Aug. 26, 2016), the court concluded that the provisions requiring transgender individuals to use school bathrooms, locker rooms and showers corresponding to the biological sex listed on their birth certificate likely violate Title IX as interpreted by the U.S. Department of Education and upheld by the 4th Circuit.  In reaching its conclusion, the court relied heavily on evidence that the prior practice of dealing with bathroom use by transgender students on a case-by-case basis had worked well.

The court however rejected plaintiffs' contention that the North Carolina law violates the equal protection clause, saying in part:

it appears that the privacy interests that justify the State’s provision of sex-segregated bathrooms, showers, and other similar facilities arise from physiological differences between men and women, rather than differences in gender identity....

The court reserved judgment on plaintiffs' substantive due process claims relating to informational privacy and unwanted medical treatment.  Baptist Press reports on the decision.

According to AP, plaintiffs yesterday filed an appeal with the 4th Circuit on the equal protection issue.

Appeals Court Refuses To Dismiss Suit Over Entitlement To Mosque Property

In United Islamic Society v. Masjed Abubakr Al-Seddiq, Inc., (MN App. Aug. 29, 2016), a Minnesota state appellate court affirmed a trial court's refusal to dismiss a suit over ownership of mosque property because "it is premature to decide that resolution of this case will necessarily involve improper government entanglement with religion."  The suit involves a dispute between two non-profit corporations over which one is is the rightful beneficiary of properties held in trust for the benefit of the Rochester, Minnesota Muslim community.  The court said in part:

A determination of whether this case can be resolved using neutral principles of law depends upon a close reading of UIS’s civil complaint and trust petition. In its civil complaint, UIS makes no mention of any religious doctrine and does not request relief for religious reasons. UIS instead requests a determination that it is the intended beneficiary of the trust based on the lease, warranty deeds, meeting minutes, and MAAS resolution....

Defendants argued that because the transfer of the properties to the North American Islamic Trust included a requirement that the properties are to be held in "waqf," the court will need to interpret the meaning of waqf, a religious term, to resolve the dispute.  The appellate court however disagreed, saying:

If the district court declares the declaration of trust valid, there appears to be no reason to interpret or analyze “waqf.” Similarly, if the district court declares the declaration of trust invalid ... a beneficiary determination likely depends on testimony and the documents in the record regarding the parties’ intent, which may include, among others, the warranty deeds that reference “Waqf (Islamic trust).” ...The limited information in the record about “waqf” simply does not suggest that a doctrinal analysis of “waqf” will be necessary to or dispositive of a beneficiary determination.

The court also rejected the argument that the case should be dismissed because of an arbitration clause in the declaration of trust, saying:

Because appellants did not invoke the arbitration clause in the declaration of trust until MAAS and NAIT’s summary-judgment motion, which was filed more than two years after the start of UIS’s civil action and after extensive litigation in both cases, we conclude that the district court’s finding that appellants waived their right to invoke the arbitration clause is not clearly erroneous.

Recent Articles, Books and Upcoming Conference of Interest

From SSRN:

• Jeffrey Benjamin Meyers, Nietzsche and the Law of the ‘The Other’: The Jew in Refraction, (August 19, 2016).
• Carl J. Minniti, The Lanham Act's Unconstitutional Hodgepodge, (17 Rutgers Journal of Law and Religion 315, 2016).
• Claudia E. Haupt, Unprofessional Advice, (University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law, Vol. 19, 2017).
• Evelyn Aswad, The Role of U.S. Technology Companies as Enforcers of Europe's New Internet Hate Speech Ban, (Forthcoming in Columbia Human Rights Law Review Online).
• Dr. R.N. Mangoli &Tanushri Anchan, Honour Based Violence: A Threat to Humanity, (August 23, 2016).
• Eduardo M. Penalver, Laura Spitz, Elizabeth Brundige & Lucia Domínguez Cisneros, U.S. Nonprofit Activity in Cuba: The Cuban Context, (Cornell Legal Studies Research Paper No. 16-31, 2016).

Recent & Forthcoming Books:

• Nelson Tebbe, Religious Freedom in an Egalitarian Age, (Harvard Univ. Press, Jan. 2017).
• Harvey Cox, The Market as God, (Harvard Univ. Press, Sept. 2016).
• Finbarr Curtis, The Production of American Religious Freedom, (NYU Press, Aug. 2016).
• Robert W. Hefner (ed.), Shari'a Law and Modern Muslim Ethics, (Indiana Univ. Press, Aug. 2016).
• Robert Schmuhl, Fifty Years with Father Hesburgh-- On and Off the Record, (Univ. of Notre Dame Press, Aug. 2016).

Upcoming Conference:

• 2016 Conference of Religiously Affiliated Law Schools, Regent University, Sept. 29-30.

Court Upholds California's Removal of Belief Exemption From Vaccination Requirement

In Whitlow v. State of California, (SD CA, Aug. 26, 2016), a California federal district court refused to grant a preliminary injunction against California's recently enacted SB 277 , a law requiring school students (other than those being home-schooled) to be immunized against ten specific diseases, and removing the state's prior exemption for those whose personal beliefs oppose immunization. The court said:

it is clear that the Constitution does not require the provision of a religious exemption to vaccination requirements, much less a PBE.

San Diego Union Tribune reports on the decision. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Daker v. Warren, (11th Cir., Aug. 22, 2016), the 11th Circuit reversed and remanded the district court's dismissal of a Muslim inmate's free exercise challenge (but not his RLUIPA challenge) to a total ban on hardcover books and the dismissal of his RLUIPA challenge (but not his free exercise challenge) to holding religious services only on Wednesdays.

In Berger v. Burl, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111380 (ED AR, Aug. 22, 2016), an Arkansas federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111559, Aug. 5, 2016) and dismissed an an atheist inmate's claim that his rights were infringed when he was not allowed to grow a beard and long hair for non-religious reasons while others were permitted to do so for religious reasons.  The court allowed him to proceed on his complaint that a Christian group was allowed to line up outside his cell to sing and preach when he was placed in lock down.

In Robertson v. Call, 2016 Kan. App. Unpub. LEXIS 682 (KS App., Aug. 19, 2016), a Kansas appellate court affirmed dismissal of a free exercise challenge by a Messianic Jewish inmate to a rule that prevents prisoners in segregation from having face-to-face meetings with their spiritual advisers.  The court remanded for further findings an Establishment Clause challenge to the rule.

In Martin v. MacLaren, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112812 (WD MI, Aug. 24, 2016), a Michigan federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation and dismissed an inmate's complaint that he was denied access to his book titled "The Fundamentals of the Yoruba Religion (Orisa Worship)."

In Al-Azim v. Everett, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 113109 (ED VA, Aug. 23, 2016), a Virginia federal district court allowed an inmate to move ahead with his complaint that he was not receiving meals that complied with Nation of Islam dietary requirements. However the court dismissed his complaints about the need for more time for group religious activities and his inability to purchase CDs of Minister Farrakhan's sermons directly from the Final Call, Inc.

In Blalock v. Smith, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114215 (ND NY, Aug. 24, 2016), a New York federal magistrate judge recommended that a Muslim inmate be allowed to proceed with his complaint that he was not permitted to wear his pants hemmed above the top of his ankle as religiously required; but recommended dismissing complaints over his inability to attend two congregate prayer services and over a cell search that confiscated religious books.

In Greene v. County of Durham Office of the Sheriff Department, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114425 (MD NC, Aug. 26, 2016), a North Carolina federal district court permitted a Muslim inmate to proceed with a claim that arose when he was a pre-trial detainee that he was denied access to the day room for Islamic studies, but dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies his complaint that his Ramadan meal was thrown away and he was not given a replacement.

Texas Anti-SLAPP Law Does Not Protect Free Exercise Rights

In Davis v. Mount Gilead Baptist Church, (TX App., Aug. 25, 2016), a Texas state appellate court held that Texas' anti-SLAPP statute-- designed to prevent the use of frivolous suits to chill speech rights-- only applies to suits filed in response to defendant's exercise of free speech, right of petition or right of association.  It does not apply to suits that respond to free exercise of religion.

Legislative Scorecard On Issues Important To Non-Theists Released

The Center for Freethought Equality last week released its scorecard for U.S. House members in the 114th Congress on seven votes of importance to secular and non-theistic Americans. In releasing the scorecard, CFE said in part:

Representatives were scored based on their voting records on legislation that either bolstered or weakened the separation of church and state. The scorecard included legislators’ co-sponsorship for the Darwin Day Resolution (H.Res. 548), which would recognize February 12 as a celebration of the accomplishments of naturalist Charles Darwin while opposing the teaching of creationism and intelligent design in public schools....

Of all the legislators ranked, Rep. Judy Chu (CA-27) and Rep. Mike Honda (CA-17) had the highest scores.

Denial of Zoning Variance To Yeshiva Violates RLUIPA

In Yeshiva Gedolah Na'os Yaakov v. Township of Ocean NJ, (D NJ, Aug. 25, 2016), a New Jersey federal district court held that that Ocean, New Jersey's Zoning Board of Adjustment violated RLUIPA when it denied a use variance to allow plaintiffs to operate a Jewish post-high school yeshiva.  Making findings about the school's code of conduct for its students, the court ordered the township to grant approval of use of the building for a school of up to 80 students (less than the 96 the school wanted), subject to a detailed list of improvements and changes to the property. Reporting on the decision, Asbury Park Press quoted plaintiffs' attorney who said in a prepared statement:

Zoning regulation should never be used as a tool to accommodate the unreasonable fears and prejudice of small-minded individuals desperate to keep a certain population out of their neighborhoods.