Second Major Leader of SNAP Resigns

RNS reports that Barbara Blaine, founder of the advocacy group Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP), resigned effective yesterday.  This is the second major departure from the organization in recent weeks.  In late January it was announced that long-time Executive Director of SNAP,  David Clohessy, had left his position with the organization in December.  Both Blaine and Clohessy deny that their departures are related to a lawsuit filed against SNAP in January.  The suit alleges that the organization exploits survivors by referring them to attorneys from whom SNAP receives kickbacks. (See prior posting.)

Washington Federal District Court Issues TRO Against Travel Ban; Appeal Filed-- Here Are Links To Primary Sources [UPDATED]

As widely reported, a Washington federal district court yesterday issued a nation-wide temporary restraining order against key portions of President Trump's Executive Order that temporarily banned entry of individuals from seven Muslim-majority countries and restricted entry of refugees, particularly those from Syria. (See prior posting.) The temporary restraining order (full text) in State of Washington v. Trump, (WD WA, Feb. 3, 2017), does not set out which of plaintiffs' arguments were persuasive to the court.  Those arguments, as set out in the complaint (full text), include establishment clause, due process and equal protection claims as well as statutory claims. Washington's Attorney General has provided links to all documents in the case. The court has posted a video of the full oral arguments and judge's ruling in the case.  Americans United filed an amicus brief (full text) with the district court setting out at length the Establishment Clause arguments. As reported by The Hill, this evening the Justice Department filed a notice of appeal (full text) in the case with the 9th Circuit. According to CNN, focusing on the court's designation of the motions panel for February:

The three judges who will likely hear the appeal -- assuming no one has to step aside over any conflicts -- are: Judge William Canby, who was appointed by President Jimmy Carter; Richard Clifton, who was appointed by Bush; and Michelle Friedland, a President Barack Obama appointee.

UPDATE: On Saturday night (2/4) the 9th Circuit denied an immediate stay of the district court opinion pending briefing by Monday on the emergency motion. (Full text of 9th Circuit's order). The order was issued by Judges Canby and Friedland.

UPDATE2: Also on Feb. 3, a Massachusetts federal district court refused to renew a temporary restraining order that had prevented detention and/or removal of individuals with approved refugee applications who would be legally admitted to the United States in absence of President Trump's Executive Order. The original TRO expired Feb. 5.  The court in Louhghalam v. Trump, (D MA, Feb. 3, 2017) held that rational basis review applies to equal protection challenges to federal government categorizations with respect to non-resident aliens.  It held that plaintiffs raising establishment clause objections lacked standing to do so.  It added:

Moreover, the language in Section 5 of the EO is neutral with respect to religion. Plaintiffs submit in their amended complaint that Section 5 favors Muslims over Christians, in violation of the Establishment Clause. The provisions of Section 5, however, could be invoked to give preferred refugee status to a Muslim individual in a country that is predominately Christian. Nothing in Section 5 compels a finding that Christians are preferred to any other group.

ACLU has links to all the pleadings in the Louhghalam case.

Draft Executive Order Would Expand Free Exercise Protections

The Nation reported yesterday on a leaked copy of a draft Executive Order on Religious Freedom which is currently being circulated by the White House, saying:

The draft order seeks to create wholesale exemptions for people and organizations who claim religious or moral objections to same-sex marriage, premarital sex, abortion, and trans identity, and it seeks to curtail women’s access to contraception and abortion through the Affordable Care Act. 

The draft titled Establishing a Government-Wide Initiative to Respect Religious Freedom is set out in full in The Nation report.  The Order provides in part:

“Religious organization” shall be construed broadly to encompass any organization, including closely held for-profit corporations, operated for a religious purpose, even if its purpose is not exclusively religious, and is not limited to houses of worship or tax-exempt organizations, or organizations controlled by or associated with a house of worship or a convention or association of churches.

Sec. 3 Religious Freedom Principles and Policymaking Criteria. All executive branch departments and agencies (“agencies”) shall, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, adhere to the following principles and criteria when formulating and implementing regulations, actions, or policies:

(a) Religious freedom is not confined to religious organizations or limited to religious exercise that takes place in houses of worship or the home. It is guaranteed to persons of all faiths and extends to all activities of life.

(b) Persons and organizations do not forfeit their religious freedom when providing social services, education, or healthcare; earning a living, seeking a job, or employing others; receiving government grants or contracts: or otherwise participating in the marketplace, the public square, or interfacing with Federal, State or local governments....

Trump At National Prayer Breakfast Again Promises Johnson Amendment Repeal

President Donald Trump spoke yesterday at the National Prayer Breakfast. (Full text of remarks.)  In a wide-ranging speech, he reiterated his campaign promise to repeal the Johnson Amendment that restricts non-profits from participating in partisan election campaigns, saying in part:

It was the great Thomas Jefferson who said, “The God who gave us life, gave us liberty.”  Jefferson asked, “Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?”

Among those freedoms is the right to worship according to our own beliefs.  That is why I will get rid of, and totally destroy, the Johnson Amendment and allow our representatives of faith to speak freely and without fear of retribution.  I will do that -- remember.

Not all religious groups favor repeal of the tax code ban on electioneering.  Responding to Trump's remarks, the Baptist Joint Committee issued a press release, saying in part:

Politicizing churches does them no favors. The promised repeal is an attack on the integrity of both our charitable organizations and campaign finance system.

Inviting churches to intervene in campaigns with tax-deductible offerings would fundamentally change our houses of worship. It would usher our partisan divisions into the pews and harm the church’s ability to provide refuge.

Trump Travel Ban Will Not Apply To Israelis Born in Covered Nations

A refinement was announced yesterday to President Trump's Executive Order on entry into the U.S. of nationals of seven Muslim-majority countries.  The modification, which essentially carves out an exception for Jews from those nations now living in Israel, may strengthen arguments of opponents who contend that the Executive Order operates de facto as a "Muslim ban."  The U.S. Embassy in Israel yesterday announced:

Travelers with an existing valid visa in their Israeli passport may travel to the United States, even if they are also a national of or born in one of the seven restricted countries (Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen). Embassy Tel Aviv will continue to process visa applications and issue visas to eligible visa applicants who apply with an Israeli passport, even if born in, or a dual national of, one of the seven restricted countries. Final authorization to enter the United States is always determined at the port of entry.

According to The Forward, some 140,000 Israelis, most older than 65, were born in the 7 countries covered by the travel ban. Around 45,000 were born in Iran and 53,000 were born in Iraq. No doubt almost all of these are Jews who left Arab and Muslim countries in the Middle East to move to Israel. (Background.)

6th Circuit Rules On Qualified Immunity In Prisoner Case

Last month in White v. Pauly, (S.Ct., Jan. 9, 2017), the U.S. Supreme Court in a police shooting case emphasized that when officials claim qualified immunity from damages, determining whether the official violated "clearly established" law requires examination of particularized facts rather than a determination at a "high level of generality." Yesterday the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals applied that principle in a suit by a prisoner claiming he was denied his 1st Amendment right to kosher meals.  In Hermansen v. Thompson, (6th Cir., Feb. 1, 2017), the court (citing White) upheld a finding of qualified immunity, saying:

... [W]e find the instant record devoid of support, in fact or law, for the notion that it should have been obvious to defendants that their provision of kosher food products to Hermansen, prepared in a separate kitchen facility, was nonetheless violative of his First Amendment free exercise rights because the same utensils used to prepare or serve otherwise approved meat products had also been used to prepare or serve otherwise approved dairy products, at some point, without having first been kashered and certified by a rabbi.

[Thanks to Tom Rutledge for the lead.]

Falwell To Head New Federal Task Force on Department of Education Policies

The Chronicle of Higher Education reported this week that Liberty University president Jerry Falwell, Jr. has been asked by President Trump to lead a new task force that will identify Department of Education policies and procedures that should be changed.  Falwell says he sees the task force as a response to overreaching regulation of accreditation standards and policies that affect student recruitment by colleges. The New York Times yesterday speculated that Falwell's Liberty University could benefit from certain regulatory rollbacks.

Judge Gorsuch's Record On Religious Liberty and Church-State Issues

President Trump has nominated 10th Circuit Judge Neil M. Gorsuch to fill the late Antonin Scalia's seat on the U.S. Supreme Court. Judge Gorsuch, who has been on the 10th Circuit for over ten years, has a lengthy record on church-state and religious liberty issues. Christianity Today describes him as "a favorite pick among Christian conservatives."  RNS has an article entitled 5 faith facts on Trump’s Supreme Court pick, Neil Gorsuch.

Here are religion cases in which Judge Gorsuch either wrote an opinion or served on the panel of the 10th Circuit which decided the case:

⇾In Summum v. Pleasant Grove City, 499 F.3d 1170 (10th Cir. 2007), he joined a dissent from denial of an en banc rehearing in a case in which the 3-judge panel required the city to allow a Seven Aphorisms Monument in a city park. The U.S. Supreme Court eventually reversed the panel's decision. [update]

⇾In Green v. Haskell County Board of Commissioners, 574 F.3d 1235 (2009) he wrote a dissent from the denial of an en banc rehearing in a case in which a 3-judge panel had held that a Ten Commandments display outside a county court house violated the Establishment Clause.

⇾In Abdulhaseeb v. Calbone, 600 F.3d 1301(2010) he joined the unanimous decision holding that there were genuine issues of material fact on the issue of whether the state prison policy regarding halal foods substantially burdened a Muslim inmate's religious exercise. The court decided for the first time in the 10th Circuit the meaning of "substantial burden" under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act.

⇾In American Atheists, Inc. v. Davenport, 637 F.3d 1095 (2010) he wrote a dissent from the denial of an en banc rehearing in a case which held that memorial crosses donated by the Utah Highway Patrol Association and placed on public property to commemorate fallen troopers violate the Establishment Clause.

⇾ In United States v. Quaintance, 608 F.3d 717  (2010) he wrote a unanimous opinion refusing to allow a RFRA defense to drug charges, upholding the district court's conclusion that defendants, founding members of the Church of Cognizance, did not hold sincere religious beliefs regarding the use of marijuana. [Update]

⇾In Williams v. Sibbett, 442 Fed. Appx. 385 (2011) he joined a unanimous opinion that affirmed dismissal of a suit by a Muslim inmate who alleged that members of the Utah Board of Pardon and Parole decided to disfavor Muslims in parole decisions and to favor members of the Mormon church.

⇾Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. v. Sebelius, 723 F.3d 1114 (2013) was the 10th Circuit's en banc decision in the famous Hobby Lobby case holding that two related closely held corporations were likely to succeed on their claim that under RFRA the companies cannot be required to provide health insurance that enables access to contraceptives that they find morally problematic. Judge Gorsuch wrote a concurring opinion emphasizing that the owners of the companies as well as the companies themselves should be entitled to a preliminary injunction.

⇾In Yellowbear v. Lampert, 741 F.3d 48 (2014) he wrote a unanimous opinion vacating a district court's dismissal of a RLUIPA suit by a Native American inmate seeking access to the prison's sweat lodge.

⇾In Ali v. Wingert, 569 Fed. Appx. 562 (2014) he wrote a unanimous opinion upholding a prison regulation that requires inmates wishing to use their religious name on their mail to also use their committed name along with it.

⇾In Little Sisters of the Poor Home for the Aged v. Burwell, 799 F.3d 1315 (2015) he joined a dissent to denial of en banc review of a 3-judge panel's decision that the religious exercise of Little Sisters of the Poor was not substantially burdened by requiring it to execute government forms in order to obtain an exemption from furnishing health insurance that includes contraceptive coverage.

⇾In Planned Parenthood Association of Utah v. Herbert, 839 F.3d 1301 (2016) he dissented from denial of en banc review of a panel decision granting a preliminary injunction to Planned Parenthood to prevent Utah's cutting off the pass-through of federal funds to the organization.

Judge Gorsuch has also written a book titled The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia, published by Princeton University Press. Here is an excerpt from the publisher's description of the book:

After assessing the strengths and weaknesses of arguments for assisted suicide and euthanasia, Gorsuch builds a nuanced, novel, and powerful moral and legal argument against legalization, one based on a principle that, surprisingly, has largely been overlooked in the debate--the idea that human life is intrinsically valuable and that intentional killing is always wrong. At the same time, the argument Gorsuch develops leaves wide latitude for individual patient autonomy and the refusal of unwanted medical treatment and life-sustaining care, permitting intervention only in cases where an intention to kill is present.

[Note: This post will be updated to include other Gorsuch opinions that come to my attention. I invite readers to e-mail me information on any I have omitted.]

Boy Scouts Will Admit Transgender Males

The Boy Scouts of America announced yesterday that it will accept and register youth in Cub Scout and Boy Scout programs based on the gender identity indicated on the application. This reverses a century old policy that relied on gender stated on the birth certificate to determine eligibility for single-gender programs.  New York Times reports on these developments. Under the new policy a trangender boy was invited back into a New Jersey Cub Scout pack according to NorthJersey.com.

Puerto Rico Federal District Court Rules Says Catholic School Pension Plan Is Covered By ERISA

In Martinez-Gonzalez v. Catholic Schools of the Archdioceses of San Juan Pension Plan, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11903 (D PR, Jan. 27, 2017), a Puerto Rico federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11904, Jan. 9, 2017) and refused to dismiss a suit claiming that the pension plan covering employees of Catholic schools in Puerto Rico does not qualify for the "church plan" exemption in ERISA. The magistrate judge ruled in part:

In light of the plain meaning of the statutory text establishing ERISA's church-plan exemption, this court should find that the better-reasoned view holds that a church plan established by a church-affiliated organization——such as the Superintendence—— [rather than by the Church itself] and maintained by such an organization is not a church plan.

Plaintiffs allege that termination of the plan was in violation of ERISA procedures. This term the U.S. Supreme Court has granted certiorari in cases raising the same legal issue. (See prior posting.)

British Court Denies Transgender Parent Contact With Children Because of Religious Community's Reaction

A British Family Court in J v. B and the Children, (EWFC, Jan. 30, 2017), has rejected the petition of an Orthodox Jewish father, a member of the Manchester Charedi community who left home to live as a transgender woman, to have direct contact with his five children.  The court limited the father's contact to letters four times a year to the children. The court said in part:

These parents decided to bring up their children according to the narrow ways of the community, and they continue to agree about this. That being the case, the priority must be to sustain the children in the chosen way of life, preserving their existing family and social networks and their education.... Contact carries the clear risk that the children and their mother will become the next casualties in a collision between two unconnecting worlds. The father has already experienced the consequences of that collision, and no one knows better than she does how very painful they can be.....

I have reached the unwelcome conclusion that the likelihood of the children and their mother being marginalised or excluded by the ultra‐Orthodox community is so real, and the consequences so great, that this one factor, despite its many disadvantages, must prevail over the many advantages of contact.

The Guardian reports on the decision. [Thanks to Mel Kaufman and Paul deMello for the lead.]

CAIR Sues Over Trump Executive Order

CAIR announced yesterday that it has filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of President Trump's recent Executive Order on refugees and on those entering the U.S. from any of seven Muslim-majority countries. The complaint (full text) in Sarsour v. Trump, (ED VA, filed 1/30/2017) alleges that a hidden purpose of the Executive order (which the complaint calls a Muslim Exclusion Order) is to initiate the mass expulsion of Muslims lawfully living in the U.S. by denying them the ability to to renew their lawful status or receive immigration benefits. Plaintiffs claim that the order violates the Establishment and Free Exercise clauses and denies plaintiffs equal protection of the laws.  Politico reports on the lawsuit.

Lawsuit Challenges Trump Executive Order As Establishment Clause Violation

A direct Establishment Clause challenge to President Trump's Executive Order on immigration and refugees was raised in a lawsuit filed Saturday in a California federal district court in a suit brought on behalf of the People of the United States and of California.  The brief complaint (full text) in People of the United States of America and the State of California v. Trump, (ND CA, filed 1/28/2017) contends that the Executive Order violates separation of powers and is facially unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause because it bars "entry of persons to the United States based on their adherence to religious beliefs shared in certain countries." Politico reports on the lawsuit.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Benjamin Schonthal & Tom Ginsburg, Setting an Agenda for the Socio-Legal Study of Contemporary Buddhism (Introduction), (Asian Journal of Law and Society 3:1-16 (2016)).
• Levi Cooper, Culpability for Curses in Jewish Law and Mystical Lore, (Wizards vs. Muggles: Essays on Identity and the Harry Potter Universe, ed. Christopher E. Bell (Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2016), 168-193).
• Netta Barak Corren, Beyond Dissent and Compliance, (Oxford Journal of Law and Religion, Forthcoming).
• Dimitry Gegenava, Some Technical and Legal Problems of the Constitutional Agreement, (Journal of Law, No. 1, 2016).
• Nelson Tebbe, Religious Freedom in an Egalitarian Age (Introduction), (N. Tebbe, Religious Freedom in an Egalitarian Age, Harvard University Press, 2017).
• Helge Årsheim, Religion and International Organizations, (In Ian Hurd, Ian Johnstone, and Jacob Katz Cogan (eds), The Oxford Handbook of International Organizations. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 490-507 (2016)).
• Ioana Cismas, The Child's Best Interests and Religion: A Case Study of the Holy See's Best Interests Obligations and Clerical Child Sexual Abuse, (Elaine E. Sutherland and Lesley-Anne Barnes Macfarlane (eds.) Implementing Article 3 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child: Best Interests, Welfare and Well-Being (Cambridge University Press, 2016), pp. 310-325).
• Dipayan Chowdhury & Atmaja Tripathy, Recognizing the Right of the Third Gender to Marriage and Inheritance Under Hindu Personal Law in India, (Chowdhury D., Tripathy A. Recognizing the Right of the Third Gender to Marriage and Inheritance under Hindu Personal Law in India. BRICS Law Journal. 2016;3(3):43-60).
• Michael Boucai, Is Assisted Procreation an LGBT Right?, (Wisconsin Law Review, Vol. 2016, No. 6, 2016).
• Jud Campbell, Republicanism and Natural Rights at the Founding, (32 Constitutional Commentary 85 (2017)).
• Mohamed A. Arafa & Ahmed El-Ashry, Gender Equality in the Arab and Muslim World: Whither Post-Revolutionary Egypt?, (Gender Equality in a Global Perspective (Routledge Advances in Management and Business Studies, Chapter 3, London & New York, 2017)).

From SmartCILP and elsewhere:

• Justice Barbara A. Jackson, Called to Duty: Justice William J. Gaston, 94 North Carolina Law Review 2051-2096 (2016).
• Gregory A. Mark, Hobby Lobby and Corporate Personhood: Taking the U.S. Supreme Court's Reasoning at Face Value, 65 DePaul Law Review 535-558 (2016).
• Sukhsimranjit Singh, Religious Arbitration and Its Struggles with American Law & Judicial Review, 16 Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal 360-406 (2016).
• Dr. Isha Ann Emhoff, Ellen Fugate & Nir Eyal, Is There a Moral Right to Nonmedical Vaccine Exemption?, 42 American Journal of Law & Medicine 598-620 (2016).
• Lidiya Mishchenko, In Defense of Churches: Can the IRS Limit Tax Abuse by “Church” Impostors?, 84 George Washington Law Review 1361 (2016).

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Wilson v. Wetzel, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9011 (MD PA, Jan. 23, 2017), a Pennsylvania federal district court dismissed a claim by a Hebrew-Israelite inmate that he was wrongly denied kosher bag meals on the Fast of Gedaliah.

In Arnold v. Heyns, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8017 (ED MI, Jan. 20, 2017), a Michigan federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182603, Dec. 21, 2016) and dismissed an Orthodox Jewish inmate's complaint that he was served a vegan diet rather than a kosher diet that included meat. However it allowed him to move ahead with his claim that the vegan meals were not kosher because of cross-contamination.

In Dayton v. Lisenbee, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9459 (ED MO, Jan. 24, 2017), a Missouri federal district court held that "while RLUIPA allows official-capacity claims against prison officials, it does not authorize monetary damages based on those claims." However it allowed plaintiff to proceed on his individual-capacity constitutional claims for monetary relief.

In Husband v. Dougherty, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11609 (D AZ, Jan. 26, 2017), an Arizona federal district court dismissed an inmate's suit against two prison chaplains complaining that he was not granted a kosher diet during Passover, a daily kosher diet or a shaving waiver.

In Balcar v. Smith, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10899 (WD KY, Jan. 26, 2017), a Kentucky federal district court rejected an inmate's complaint that he is not being served chicken and pork because these meats do not comply with a Muslim diet.  He claimed this violates the Establishment Clause, the equal protection clause and RLUIPA.

In Ha'Keem v. Mesojedec, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11321 (D MN, Jan. 25, 2017), a Minnesota federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182928, Dec. 29, 2016) and dismissed with leave to amend a suit by Muslims civilly committed in the Minnesota Sex Offender Program who object to restrictions on their use of prayer oil and numerous other actions that burden their exercise of religion.

6th Circuit Rejects Free Exercise Defense To Marijuana Charges

In United States v. Barnes, (6th Cir., Jan. 26, 2017), the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to dismiss an indictment of a member of the Oklevueha Native American Church who was charged with growing large quantities of marijuana.  Defendant claimed that the 1st Amendment and RFRA allowed him to grow the plants to donate to the church. The court disagreed saying in part:

Barnes did not make an adequate showing that the CSA substantially burdened his practice of religion. Barnes admitted that growing marijuana and donating it to the church is not required by his religion.... [W]hile marijuana is considered a medicine of the church, it is not an essential sacrament of the faith.... Peyote, by contrast, is the only “sacrament” of the church. Barnes did not provide any historical evidence that the manufacturing of marijuana is central to the ONAC religion specifically, or to Native American religion in general.

... [M]anufacturing marijuana and intending to donate it to the Toledo church was a "personal belief" and a choice that he made, not one that was critical to practicing the ONAC faith. While Barnes is correct that it is not the place of the court to decide the "centrality of . . . beliefs to canonical texts," that does not prevent this court from determining whether a particular practice is required by a religion as a part of the substantial-burden analysis.... 

Church Loses Its Challenge To Town's Sign Ordinance

In Signs for Jesus v. Town of  Pembroke, NH, (D NH, Jan. 27, 2017), a New Hampshire federal district court upheld a New Hampshire town's application of its Sign Ordinance to prohibit a church (that was outside the commercial district) from installing an electronic changing sign. The court, summarizing its conclusions, said:

First, the Town’s decision to deny the Church’s request for an electronic sign had nothing to do with either religion or the content of the Church’s speech. Second, the decision served the Town’s important governmental interests in aesthetics and traffic safety in a manner that was narrowly tailored to serve those interests. Third, the decision does not unreasonably burden the Church’s right to practice its religious beliefs, to practice free speech, or to use its property. Finally, the Town has not treated the Church differently from any other similarly situated landowner. In light of these conclusions, the Church’s contention that it should be free from the effect of the Town’s electronic sign ordinance amounts to a demand, not for a level playing field, but instead for a right to be treated differently from all other private landowners. Neither the state and federal constitutions nor RLUIPA requires this result. 

Pakistani Court Sentences Last of Hajj Corruption Defendants

In Pakistan yesterday, a special court sentenced the last of 4 defendants in the 2010 Hajj corruption case to 30 years in prison and a fine equivalent to $386,000(US).  AAJ-TV reports that defendant Ahmad Faiz was charged with being the front man for the Religious Affairs Director General.  Defendants were charged with massive corruption in the arrangements for Pakistani Hajj pilgrims. (See prior posting.)  Last year, 3 other defendants in the case were sentenced. The former federal minister for religious affairs Hamid Saeed Kazmi and the additional secretary Aftab Ahmed were sentenced to 16 years in prison, while Director General for Hajj Affairs Rao Shakeel was sentenced to 40 years. (Express Tribune, June 3, 2016).

Trump's Immigration Executive Order Faces 1st Amendment Challenges

As reported by the Washington Post, yesterday President Trump signed an Executive Order (full text) suspending for 90 days immigrant and non-immigrant entry into the U.S. of aliens from seven Muslim-majority countries-- Iraq, Iran, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Libya and Somalia. (It should be noted that the countries to which the Executive Order is applicable is discoverable only by elaborate cross references in Sec. 3(c) of the Order that ultimately lead to this list developed last year by the Department of Homeland Security under the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of travelers not eligible to participate in the visa waiver program). The Executive Order does not apply to those entering under various diplomatic visas.

The Executive Order also suspends admission of all refugees for 120 days, and of Syrian refugees for an indefinite period.  It provides that when refugee admissions are resumed:

the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, is further directed to make changes, to the extent permitted by law, to prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual's country of nationality.

Following up on this provision, Trump told the Christian Broadcasting Network that priority will be given to persecuted Christians in the Middle East, particularly Syria. The Legal Director of the ACLU in a post earlier today argued that the Executive Order's targeting of Muslims and favoring of Christians violates the Establishment Clause. Meanwhile CAIR announced that it will be holding a news conference Monday on a lawsuit that it will file in federal district court in Virginia to "challenge the constitutionality of the order because its apparent purpose and underlying motive is to ban people of the Islamic faith from Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States."

Pence Speaks To March For Life

As reported by the New York Times, today Vice President Mike Pence spoke in person to the thousands of marchers in this year's anti-abortion March For Life. (Full text of remarks.)  He said in part:

More than two-hundred and forty years ago, our Founders wrote words that have echoed through the ages. They declared “these truths to be self-evident.” That we are, all of us, “endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights,” and “that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” Forty-four years ago, our Supreme Court turned away from the first of these timeless ideals....

But as it is written, “let your gentleness be evident to all.” Let this movement be known for love, not anger – for compassion, not confrontation. When it comes to matters of the heart, there’s nothing stronger than gentleness.

Even Trump's Statement on International Holocaust Memorial Day Is Not Without Controversy

Today is International Holocaust Memorial Day.  The day-- the anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau-- was chosen by the United Nations General Assembly as the date for the international commemoration. CBS News reports on commemoration activities in various countries.  President Donald Trump issued a Statement (full text) marking the commemoration, saying in part:

It is with a heavy heart and somber mind that we remember and honor the victims, survivors, heroes of the Holocaust. It is impossible to fully fathom the depravity and horror inflicted on innocent people by Nazi terror.

Jonathan Greenblatt, head of the Anti-Defamation League commented on the President's Statement in a Tweet, saying:

Puzzling and troubling White House Holocaust Memorial Day Statement has no mention of Jews. GOP and Democratic presidents have done so in the past.

Other media, such as the Washington Post and  Haaretz make the same point about Trump's statement.

Presidential Proclamation For National School Choice Week

Yesterday President Donald Trump issued a Proclamation (full text) declaring January 22 through January 28 as National School Choice Week. The Proclamation reads in part:

Our country is home to many great schools and many extraordinary teachers -- whether they serve in traditional public schools, public charter schools, magnet schools, private or religious schools, or in homeschooling environments....

As our country celebrates National School Choice Week, I encourage parents to evaluate the educational opportunities available for their children.  I also encourage State lawmakers and Federal lawmakers to expand school choice for millions of additional students.

March For Life Is Today; VP Pence Will Address Marchers

In Washington, D.C., the annual March for Life, protesting the U.S. Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision is being held today.  Roe was decided in January of 1973. As reported by ABC News, this year Vice President Mike Pence and counselor to the president Kellyanne Conway will both address the marchers in person.  They are the highest-ranking White House officials to ever address the march in person. Other speakers include Cardinal Timothy Dolan, Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), Rep. Mia Love (R-Utah), and Rep. Chris Smith (R-New Jersey).

3rd Circuit Hears Appeal In Convictions For Coercing Jewish Divorce Documents

The U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday heard oral arguments in United States v. Stimler. (Audio of full oral arguments.) In the case, a New Jersey federal district court convicted three defendants on charges growing out of arrangements to abduct, beat and torture recalcitrant Jewish husbands who refused to give their civilly divorced wives a religious divorce document (get). (See prior posting.) According to AP's report on Wednesday's oral arguments, defendants' attorneys argued, among other things, that the trial judge erred in not admitting evidence into trial that explained the defendants' religious beliefs. (See prior related posting.) Attorneys also argued lack of search warrants to obtain cellphone records.

EEOC Gets New Acting Chair; Releases 2016 Data On Charges

The EEOC announced yesterday that President Donald Trump has named Commissioner Victoria A. Lipnic as Acting Chair of EEOC. She replaces Jenny R. Yang who continues to serve as a Commissioner.

Meanwhile, last week the EEOC released detailed breakdowns of the 91,503 charges of workplace discrimination it received in fiscal year 2016. Religious discrimination was charged in 4.2% of the complaints. This year for the first time the EEOC included separate data for LGBT-based sex discrimination charges.

Pro-Life Student Group Sues Over Denial of Recognition

Yesterday a pro-life student group filed a federal lawsuit against officials of Queens College in New York after the organization was denied registered student organization status.  The complaint (full text) in Queens College Students For Life v. Members of the City University of New York Board of Trustees, (ED NY, filed 1/25/2017), contends that the unbridled discretion given to the Campus Affairs Committee to deny registered student organization status (and its associated benefits, including funding from student activity fees) allows discrimination against organizations on the basis of viewpoint. ADF issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

Suit Attacks Sex Offender Registry Law As Restricting Religious Freedom

A federal civil rights lawsuit was filed this week challenging the extensive restrictions imposed by North Carolina's Sex Offender Registration Law.  The complaint (full text) in National Association for Rational Sexual Offense Laws v. Stein, (MD NC, filed 1/23/2017) asserts that those on the registry are banned from living in many areas, working in many jobs and being present in places such as libraries, colleges and houses of worship. The 88-page complaint contends that the restrictions infringe various 1st and 14th Amendment rights of registrants, including their free exercise of religion. Because almost all churches have youth activities, restrictions on registrants being near areas primarily intended for use by minors or where minors frequently congregate mean mean that registrants are unable to attend church services. NARSOL issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

Trump Revives Dakota Pipeline, With Some Ambiguity As To Tribal Objections

As reported by the Washington Post, President Trump yesterday issued a Presidential Memorandum (full text) directing the Secretary of the Army to expedite approval of construction of the controversial Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL).  One reason DAPL has been controversial is that it was routed to run a half mile from the Standing Rock Sioux reservation, impinged on sacred tribal burial and historical sites and also created oil spill concerns by the tribe. To deal with these concerns, in December the U.S. Army announced that it would not approve an easement for DAPL under Lake Oahe in North Dakota, urging developers to find an alternative route. (See prior posting.)

Yesterday's Presidential Memorandum leaves some ambiguity regarding protection of tribal rights.  The Memorandum broadly calls for the Army to "review and approve in an expedited manner, to the extent permitted by law and as warranted, and with such conditions as are necessary or appropriate, requests for approvals to construct and operate the DAPL, including easements or rights-of-way to cross Federal areas."  However it then appears to qualify this as to the Lake Oahe easement, instructing the Army to:

consider, to the extent permitted by law and as warranted, whether to rescind or modify the memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works dated December 4, 2016 (Proposed Dakota Access Pipeline Crossing at Lake Oahe, North Dakota)....

The Guardian reports that supporters of the Standing Rock Sioux say they will fight the President's action.  Tribal chairman Dave Archambault said: "President Trump is legally required to honor our treaty rights and provide a fair and reasonable pipeline process."

Survivors' Group Sued By Former Employee Charging Kickbacks From Victims' Attorneys

A lawsuit was filed last week in an Illinois state court by a former employee of SNAP (Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests) alleging that SNAP, instead of helping sex abuse survivors, exploits them.  The complaint (full text) in Hammond v. Survivors Network of Those Abused By Priests, (Cook Cty IL Cir. Ct., filed 1/17/2017) alleges that:

SNAP routinely accepts financial kickbacks from attorneys in the form of "donations." In exchange for kickbacks, SNAP refers survivors as potential clients to attorneys, who then file lawsuits on behalf of the survivors against the Catholic Church.

The complaint adds the allegation that "SNAP is motivated largely by the personal animus of its directors and officers against the Catholic Church."  Plaintiff claims retaliatory action was taken against her after she confronted her superiors with the claim that SNAP was colluding with survivors' attorneys. Kansas City Star reports in more detail on the lawsuit. SNAP says that the allegations in the lawsuit are not true.

Meanwhile, RNS reports that long-time Executive Director of SNAP,  David Clohessy, announced yesterday that he had left his position with the organization in December. He says his departure is unrelated to the lawsuit filed last week.

School Bus Driver Wants Religious Exemption From Fingerprints In Background Check

A former bus driver for the company that transports Altoona, Pennsylvania school students has filed a religious discrimination suit in federal district court in Pennsylvania.  According to yesterday's Altoona Mirror, a recently enacted state law required bus driver Bonnie F. Kaite to undergo a criminal background check.  She sought a religious accommodation because of her Christian religious beliefs, seeking a background check that does not require her to be fingerprinted. She says that she cannot be fingerprinted because of  the verse in the Book of Revelation prohibiting the "mark of the devil."

Malaysian Politician Wants Ruling On Sharia Court Conviction

In Malaysia, Parliament member Khalid Abdul Samad last month was fined RM2,900 (the equivalent of $650 (US)) by the lower shariah court for giving a religious talk without having religious credentials in violation of Section 119 (1) of the Selangor Islamic Law Administration Enactment. Khalid insists he was giving a talk about his trip to Palestine, and was not giving a religious talk. As reported yesterday by FMT News, Khalid now wants the Election Commission to rule on whether this conviction disqualifies him from serving in Parliament.  Malaysia's constitution provides that an MP is disqualified if convicted of an offense by a "court of law" and is sentenced to a jail term of one year or more, or is fined not less than RM2,000.  Khalid's supporters argue that his violation was not a penal offense, and the Selangor shariah lower court is not a "court of law."

Court Says Environmentalism Is Not A Religion

In Krause v. Tulsa City-County Library Commission, (ND OK, Jan. 23, 2017), a Oklahoma federal district court dismissed plaintiff's complaint that "fake" recycling bins in the downtown Tulsa library unconstitutionally burden his practice of his religion which he says is Environmentalism.  According to the court:

Plaintiff’s ... Complaint contains no factual support for Plaintiff’s conclusory assertion that Environmentalism is a religious, and not a secular practice or lifestyle....

Even if this Court were to accept that Environmentalism constitutes a religion or a religious practice, Plaintiff’s allegations do not support a plausible conclusion that the Defendant’s recycling program imposes a substantial burden on the exercise of a religious practice. 

Former Employees Sue Claiming They Were Required To Participate In Scientology Traininig

According to yesterday's Madison County Herald Bulletin, Paul and Chelsea Wysong who are former employees of the Anderson, Ohio-based Continental Design Co. filed a religious discrimination lawsuit in state court in Darke County, Ohio last week.  Plaintiffs charged that company CEO Judy Nagengast required them to participate in Scientology religious practices, such as audits and training. They were told to attend Scientology courses in California, Indiana and Florida. Nagengast denies the allegations and said she plans a counter-suit.

Trump Reinstitutes Ban On Foreign Aid To NGOs That Promote Abortion Services

As reported by the New York Times, in a Presidential Memorandum (full text) issued yesterday President Trump reinstated the so-called "Mexico-City Policy."  The policy bars U.S. foreign aid dollars from going to nongovernmental organizations that offer abortion counseling or  advocate the right to seek abortions in their home countries.  Other U.S. law already bans the use of taxpayer dollars to fund actual abortion services, but this policy prohibits funds going to organizations even if they use other funds to promote abortion. The policy, originally instituted in 1984 by President Ronald Reagan has been suspended by Democratic presidents and reinstituted by Republican presidents ever since.

Supreme Court Denies Review In Challenge To Utah's Polygamy Laws

The U.S. Supreme Court today denied review in Brown v. Buhman, (Docket No. 16-333, cert. denied 1/23/2017). (Order List).  In the case, the U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed on mootness grounds the constitutional challenge to Utah's anti-polygamy laws that had been filed by the polygamous family from the television show "Sister Wives." (See prior posting.) Salt Lake Tribune reports on the denial of certiorari.

2nd Circuit Hears Arguments In Title VII Sexual Orientation Case

As reported by New York Law Journal, on Friday the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in Christiansen v. Omnicom Group (audio of full oral arguments).  At issue was whether Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act bars discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The district court in Christiansen v. Omnicom Group, Inc., (SD NY, March 9, 2016), relying on earlier 2nd Circuit precedent, held that Title VII does not bar discrimination on the basis of of sexual orientation.

Jordan's King Appoints New Chief Islamic Justice and New Mufti

According to Jordan Times, King Abdullah of Jordan issued a royal decree yesterday endorsing a Cabinet decision appointing Sheikh Abdul Karim Khasawneh as the chief Islamic justice.  The chief Islamic justice oversees the Sharia courts that deal mainly with personal status law.  Before his appointment, Khasawneh served as grand mufti, heading the Iftaa Department that has authority to issue religious edicts. In a second royal decree yesterday, Mohammad Khalaileh was appointed grand mufti to replace Khasawneh.

UPDATE:  The appointment of a new Islamic chief justice was triggered by the resignation of the prior chief justice, Ahmad Hilayel, after he delivered a Friday sermon that embarrassed the Jordanian government.  According to Al Jazeera (Jan. 23), Hilayel criticized leaders of the Gulf States for not sharing their wealth with Jordan.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Arolda Elbasani, Governing Islam in Plural Societies: Religious Freedom, State Neutrality and Traditional Heritage, (Journal of Balkan and Near Easter Studies 19 (1): 4-18, 2017).
• Perry Dane, Call and Response: A D’Var Torah on Parshat Vayechi, (January 14, 2017).
• Mitchell Landrigan, Could the Implied Freedom of Political Discourse Protect the Speech of a Delisted Anglican Minister?, (January 13, 2017).
• Charles Cohen, Losing Your Children: The Failure to Extend Civil Rights Protections to Transgender Parents, (George Washington Law Review, Vol. 85, No. 2, 2017).
• Jessica A. Clarke, Frontiers of Sex Discrimination Law, (Michigan Law Review, Vol. 115, No. 6, Forthcoming).
• Victor Asal & Udi Sommer, Legal Path Dependence and the Long Arm of the Religious State (Excerpts), ("Legal Path Dependence & The Long Arm of the Religious State: Sodomy Provisions and Gay Rights Across Nations and Over Time", SUNY Press (October 20, 2016)).
• Johanna Pesendorfer & Othmar Manfred Lehner, Islamic Banking and Finance As an Ethical Alternative: A Systematic Literature Review, (ACRN Oxford Journal of Finance and Risk Perspectives 5.2 (2016): 42-64).

From SmartCILP:

• Chad DeVeaux, The Monster Unleashed: How Hobby Lobby Threatens the Freedom of Employees to Practice Religion, 1 Concordia Law Review 114-132 (2016).
• Terence E. Hogan, Gaudium et Spes: Reflections on Dialogue with Cuba, 11 Intercultural Human Rights Law Review 249-260 (2016).
• Ayelet Hoffmann Libson, "The Heart Knows its Own Bitterness": Authority, Self, and the Origins of Patient Autonomy in Early Jewish Law, 56 American Journal of Legal Hist. 303-325 (2016).
• Cardinal Peter K.A. Turkson, Laudato Si's Challenge to Social Conscience: Society and Nature Together, 11 Intercultural Human Rights Law Review 1-13 (2016).

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Ali v. West, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6197 (ED WI, Jan. 17, 2017), a Wisconsin federal district court allowed a Muslim inmate to proceed against the prison chaplain, program director and warden on his claim that his request to be placed on the Ramadan participation list was initally ignored and then denied.

In Kemp v. Liebel, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8021 (SD IN, Jan. 20, 2017), an Indiana federal district court dismissed on qualified immunity grounds a suit by Jewish inmates against the Director of religious services alleging that their free exercise rights were infringed when for 9 months they were denied congregate religious services and study because no outside religious authority had been found to evaluate and certify inmates who could lead them.

In Luginbyhl v. Glanz, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8101 (ND OK, Jan. 20, 2017), an Oklahoma federal district court dismissed a complaint by a Hebrew Israelite inmate that he was denied a kosher diet and a seder plate and unleavened bread meals for Passover. Plaintiff had received a vegan religious diet.

In Fields v. Robinson, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7946 (ED VA, Jan. 19, 2017), a Virginia federal district court dismissed a Muslim inmate's complaint over the conditions imposed for receiving the Common Fare diet. He could not miss over 25% of his meals and could not give his food away to other inmates.

In Timmons v. Bradshaw, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8219 (SD FL, Jan. 19, 2017), a Florida federal magistrate judge recommended that an inmate be allowed to move ahead with his complaint that he was denied a kosher diet. He alleged that authorities applied a doctrinal knowledge test and required verification of his religion from a rabbi.

The Obama Administration Website Is Archived

As reported by CNN, as with past administrations the White House website of the Obama Administration disappeared when President Trump was sworn in, and whitehouse.gov now links to the Trump administration website.  However all the material that was on the Obama administration website has been archived by the National Archives and Records Administration and is now available at this archived URL: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/.  Conveniently when readers click on links to material from the Obama administration (as in Religion Clause posts), they are automatically redirected to the post on the archived site.

Trump Attends Traditional Inaugural Interfaith Prayer Service

This morning, President Donald Trump attended an interfaith prayer service at the Washington National Cathedral.  The service is traditionally held the day after the presidential inauguration. Washington Post reports:

The national prayer service... included a rabbi, an imam, a Baha’i leader, a Hindu priest and everyone in between — but with no sermon, the service included little topical content directly addressing Trump’s incipient presidency. Instead, the service focused on biblical readings, patriotic music and Christian hymns, and prayers for the country and its leadership.

This earlier article from the Washington Post lists all the participants in the service.

Religion and Trump's Inauguration

Deseret News today has a lengthy article titled The role religion played in Trump's inauguration. Reviewing the music, the invocations, the swearing-in, the prayer service at St. John's Episcopal Church this morning, and more, the report says in part:

Church choirs sang, a half-dozen religious leaders prayed and Trump mentioned God in his inauguration speech..... Trump's religiously rich ceremony was notable for a president whose personal faith wasn't a prominent part of his campaign. He formed a powerful partnership with evangelical Christian leaders and promised to make it safe to say "Merry Christmas," but he sometimes stumbled when asked to share his own beliefs.

Washington Post has a full transcript as well as analysis of the sermon delivered by Southern Baptist Pastor Robert Jefress at this morning's prayer service at St. John's. His remarks included this hardly-veiled political reference:

When I think of you, President-elect Trump, I am reminded of another great leader God chose thousands of years ago in Israel. The nation had been in bondage for decades, the infrastructure of the country was in shambles, and God raised up a powerful leader to restore the nation. And the man God chose was neither a politician nor a priest. Instead, God chose a builder whose name was Nehemiah.

And the first step of rebuilding the nation was the building of a great wall. God instructed Nehemiah to build a wall around Jerusalem to protect its citizens from enemy attack. You see, God is NOT against building walls!

Meanwhile RNS and The Forward report that Ivanka Trump and her husband Jared Kushner (who are Orthodox Jews) received a ruling from a rabbi close to them that it was permissible for them to travel in a car from activities such as the post-inaugural balls even after sunset that begins the Jewish Sabbath.  The ruling came from concerns for protecting the couple’s safety.

Homeowners Sue Over Opposition To Their Christmas Display

A lawsuit alleging violations of the federal Fair Housing Act and the Idaho Human Rights Act has been filed by a Hayden, Idaho couple who are in a battle with their neighbors and their homeowners association over an elaborate Christmas display they put on every year to raise funds for two local charities.  The display, which includes a live nativity scene with a small camel, sheep, donkey, Santa Claus, and the Grinch, attracts large crowds.  The complaint (full text) in Morris v. West Hayden Estates First Addition Homeowners Association, Inc., (D ID, filed 1/13/2017), alleges religious discrimination, contending that the Homeowners Association objects to the couple's Christian beliefs being pressed on others in the neighborhood.  KHQ News report on the lawsuit.

West Virginia School District Sued Over Bible Lessons

As announced in a press release from Freedom From Religion Foundation, the organization has filed suit against the Mercer County, West Virginia schools challenging  the "Bible in the Schools" program which provides Bible study to elementary and middle school students in 19 schools.  The complaint (full text) in Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Mercer County Board of Education, (SD WV, filed 1/18/2017), contends that Bible classes have been taught in the county schools for over 75 years, and that the Bible instruction by teachers who travel from school to school violates the Establishment Clause.

Court Orders Further Hearing In Suit By Church Member Challenging His Expulsion

In Campbell v. Shiloh Baptist Church, 2016 Conn. Super. LEXIS 3277 (CT Super. Ct., Dec. 1, 2016), plaintiff Thedress Campbell claims that Shiloh Baptist Church and its pastor removed him from the membership list and barred him from the church without following the church's bylaws.  Campbell had questioned expenditures by the pastor and had reported asbestos in the church to state authorities.  The Connecticut trial court held in part:

Although the Connecticut Supreme Court has articulated a preference for the application of the neutral principles approach in property disputes, it has not had occasion to articulate whether such an approach is to be followed in the resolution of other types of internal church conflicts. This court believes that it would....

... [T]he Constitution and Bylaws of the Church vests the authority for the expulsion or dismissal of members in the membership or congregation of the Church.... [T]he court is not deprived by the first amendment of jurisdiction to resolve whether the plaintiff was in fact expelled from the Church because this decision is not so intertwined with religious principles that it can make this determination without interfering with a legitimate claim to the free exercise of religion. Such an issue may be resolved in the present case by the application of neutral principles of law, here those of the secular laws of corporations. The evidence presented to the court did not address whether the voice of the Church was given expression by vote of its membership.... [T]herefore the court orders that the hearing be continued for the limited purpose of determining whether the Church had actually spoken, or whether the ... letter [informing him of his dismissal] was an ultra vires act of Pastor Porter and Deacon Jones.

Florida Supreme Court Denies Review In Tax Credit Scholarship Challenge

Yesterday in McCall v. Scott, (FL Sup. Ct., Jan. 18, 2017) the Florida Supreme Court declined to hear in appeal in a case challenging the constitutionality of Florida's Tax Credit Scholarship Program.  In August, a state appeals court held that a group of plaintiffs-- advocacy organizations, teachers, parents and religious and community leaders-- lack standing to pursue the case. (See prior posting.) Tampa Bay Times reports on the state Supreme Court's action.

Court Upholds Refusal To Accommodate Correctional Officer's Khimar

In Tisby v. Camden County Correctional Facility, (NJ App., Jan. 18, 2017), a New Jersey state appeals court upheld the refusal by the warden of a state correctional facility to grant a religious accommodation to a female Muslim corrections officer who sought to wear a khimar (a tight fitting head covering without a veil) at work.  The appeals court agreed that the requested accommodation would impose an undue hardship in light of the safety risks involved and the ability to hide contraband in head coverings. NJ.com reporting on the decision says that plaintiff will appeal to the state Supreme Court.

New York Trial Court Holds State's "Get" Law Unconstitutional In Some Applications

In an important decision handed down last week, a New York state trial court held unconstitutional, at least in some situations, the New York statutory provision allowing a divorce court to pressure a Jewish husband economically to give a Jewish religious bill of divorce ("get") to his wife.  Under New York's DRL §236B(6)(o), when a wife sues for divorce the court may consider her husband's maintenance of a barrier to her remarriage in deciding on distribution of marital property or the award of spousal maintenance.

In Masri v. Masri, (NY Sup Ct Orange Cty, Jan. 13, 2017), the court recognized that a previous state appellate case had upheld the constitutionality of the statutory provision where the husband has withheld a get to extract concessions from the wife in the matrimonial litigation. However the court distinguished the case before it from that precedent. The court said in part:

The withholding of a Get to extort financial concessions from one's spouse constitutes simony, i.e., an exchange of supernatural things for temporal advantage. When the husband himself so unambiguously subordinates his religion to purely secular ends, he may properly be said to have forfeited the protective mantle of the First Amendment, and the court may, quite rightfully and without constitutional hindrance, impose the secular remedies authorized by the Domestic Relations Law.

Here, however, there is not the slightest evidence that the Defendant has withheld a Get from Plaintiff to extract concessions in matrimonial litigation or for other wrongful purposes. According to Plaintiff's own evidence, Defendant has invoked religious grounds for refusing to cooperate in obtaining a Jewish religious divorce, i.e., that Plaintiff by going to secular court has waived her right to rabbinical arbitration concerning the Get....

... [I]n the circumstances presented here, increasing the amount or the duration of Defendant's post-divorce spousal maintenance obligation pursuant to DRL §236B(6)(o) by reason of his refusal to give Plaintiff a Jewish religious divorce or "Get" would violate the First and Fourteenth Amendments.... There is no evidence that the Defendant has withheld a Get to extract concessions ... or for other wrongful purposes. The religious and social consequences of which Plaintiff complains flow not from any impropriety in Defendant's withholding a "Get", but from religious beliefs to which Plaintiff no less than Defendant subscribes. To apply coercive financial pressure because of the perceived unfairness of Jewish religious divorce doctrines to induce Defendant to perform a religious act would plainly interfere with the free exercise of his (and her) religion and violate the First Amendment.

New York Law Journal reports on the decision.

In SCOTUS Oral Argument On Trademark Law, Blasphemy Becomes Relevant

The U.S. Supreme Court today heard oral arguments in Lee v. Tam (transcript of full oral argument).  At issue is whether the disparagement provision in the Lanham Act is an unconstitutional restriction on speech. The statute provides that the Patent and Trademark Office may refuse to register a trademark that disparages individuals, institutions, beliefs or national symbols, or brings them into contempt or disrepute.  In the case the PTO refused to register "The Slants" as the name of a rock band on the ground that the name is disparaging to Asians. SCOTUSblog's case page has links to a wealth of primary and secondary material on the case.

In his rebuttal in today's oral argument, Deputy Solicitor General Malcolm Stewart made an interesting reference to trademarks that may constitute illegal insults to religion under the law of a foreign country:

The preparation of the principal register is not just an ancillary consequence of this program. It's the whole point to provide a list of trademarks so other people know what has been approved, what's off limits.

And the consequence of Mr. Connell's position is that the government would have to place on a principal register, communicate to foreign countries the biased racial epithets, insulting caricatures of venerated religious figures. The test for whether the government has to do that can't be coextensive with the test for whether private people can engage in that form of expression.....

... [T]he government, at the very least, has a significant interest in not incorporating into its own communications words and symbols that the public and foreign countries will find offensive.

(See prior related posting.)

City Removes Cross From Park To Settle Lawsuit

A settlement has effectively been reached in Freedom From Religion Foundation v. City of Santa Clara, a suit challenging a cross on city owned property in Santa Clara, California. (See prior posting.) The cross was originally donated in 1953 by the Lion's Club to mark the site of the second Spanish Catholic mission established in the city in 1777. According to a press release yesterday from FFRF, the cross has been removed and donated to the Catholic Santa Clara University. The case remains pending in a California federal district court until motions to dismiss are filed and approved.

Trump To Be Sworn In On Family Bible and Lincoln Bible

According to Religion News Service, at his inauguration this Friday, Donald Trump will take the oath of office on two Bibles-- his family Bible given to him by his mother in 1955 when he graduated Sunday school, and the Lincoln Bible borrowed from the Library of Congress. The Lincoln Bible was also used by President Obama during his swearing in ceremonies.

Chanel Sued By Former Employee Alleging Denial of Religious Accommodation

The Fashion Law reported yesterday on a religious discrimination lawsuit filed last November in a California state trial court against the fashion company Chanel.  Mia Komarevic, former manager of a Chanel outlet in San Francisco, alleges that after she reported a Director who had violated company policy by wearing merchandise out of the store for the night and then returning it as new, her fellow managers retaliated in several ways.  Among other things, they attempted to force her to resign by refusing to grant her a religious accommodation, forcing her to work on Sundays in violation of her Serbian Orthodox beliefs. Ultimately she was fired for unspecified "performance reasons." Earlier this month, defendants removed the case to federal district court for the Northern District of California. (Komarevic v. Chanel, Inc., (Case No. 4:17-cv-00008).

Ten More Appointed To U.S. Holocaust Memorial Council

Yesterday the White House announced that President Obama has appointed ten more individuals to the board of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Council. Perhaps the best-known among this group of appointees is Melissa Rogers who has served in the Obama administration as Executive Director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. Also appointed was Sarah Hurwitz who has served as Michelle Obama's speech writer. Others appointed to the Council are: Daniel Benjamin; Michael Bosworth; Raffi Freedman-Gurspan; Samuel Gordon; Allan Holt; Edward Lazarus; Susan Lowenberg; and Maureen Schulman. Fifty-five members of the Council are appointed by the President for 5 year terms.

UPDATE: On Jan. 17 the President added one more appointee to the Holocaust Memorial Council-- Benjamin Rhodes who has been Obama's Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications.

Religious Leaders Have Have Variety of Top Agenda Items For President Trump

In advance of Donald Trump's inauguration on Friday, religious leaders have a variety of suggestions for Trump's top agenda items.  Here is a sampling:

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research council, says:

To start, religious liberty in the military needs to be addressed. Over the past several years we have witnessed chaplains being disciplined for their faith, and religious speech being censored. President-elect Trump can direct that religious liberty in the military be clarified and strengthened, and that appropriate training is conducted to ensure the law is followed.

In addition, our foreign policy, contrary to the law, has not prioritized religious freedom like it should. President-elect Trump must direct that religious freedom be properly integrated into all foreign policy of the United States at every level....

[G]overnment nondiscrimination legislation is needed to protect supporters of marriage between one man and one woman.  People of faith should not be punished by the government for living in accordance with their beliefs.

Rev. Robert Sirico, president of the Acton Institute says:

Abolish the Office of Faith-Based Initiatives.

Even though there is long-standing precedent for government at all levels to contract with various church-affiliated organizations, such as the Lutheran Samaritas or Catholic Charities USA, these organizations end up going to great lengths to separate their services from their religious mission. This alters the genius of faith-based charities, their effectiveness and their very mission.

This well-intentioned subsidy obfuscates the nature of religious charities by incentivizing them to draw a stark line between their faith and their works. What animates believers to care for the poor is precisely their religious belief — not to serve the interests of the state, politicians and their bureaucracies.

Franklin Graham, president of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and Samaritan’s Purse, says:

I think maybe God has allowed Donald Trump to win this election to protect this nation for the next few years by giving maybe an opportunity to have some good judges.

Elijah M. Brown, general secretary of North American Baptist Fellowship, says:

President-elect Trump should ... demonstrate his sincere commitment to the many individuals and faith communities around the world living at the edge of extinction by nominating in his first 100 days an ambassador-at-large for international religious freedom.

University Settles Suit By Christian Counseling Student

The Springfield News-Leader reports that last month Missouri State University agreed to pay former student Andrew Cash $25,000 to settle a lawsuit brought by him charging that he was suspended from the Masters program in Counseling because of his religious beliefs. (See prior posting.) Cash says he was not allowed to complete his internship at a Christian counseling institute because it refuses to counsel same-sex couples, a position which Cash embraces. Under the settlement, Cash cannot seek readmission to Missouri State University.

Prosperity Gospel Pastor, Bishop Eddie Long, Dies

As reported by CNN and AP, controversial Atlanta area mega-church pastor, Bishop Eddie Long, died Sunday morning of cancer at age 63. At its height, his New Birth Missionary Baptist Church where he preached a "prosperity gospel" had 25,000 members.  CNN summarizes his career:

Long was a national figure and one of the most innovative and polarizing pastors in the contemporary church. He was also a paradox.

He was a preacher who led an infamous march against same-sex marriage and denounced homosexuality, but he also settled a lawsuit by four young men who said he pressured them into sexual relationships....

He was a man who gave away cars and paid the college tuition of needy people, but he also was investigated by Congress after a charity he created had provided him with a million-dollar home and a Bentley luxury car.

"When he spoke, black people all over the country listened to him," said Shayne Lee, a sociologist who studies the black Pentecostal church. "He was part of the repackaging of Christianity for post-civil rights African-Americans."

Egyptian Prosecutors Say Insufficient Evidence In Case Of Attack On Christian Woman

According to AP, in Egypt prosecutors have dropped a case against several members of a Muslim mob allegedly involved last May in stripping a Christian woman of her clothes and parading her naked through the streets in a village in Minya province.  The mob was reacting to a rumor that the woman's son had an affair with a Muslim woman.  Prosecutors cited a lack of evidence, but another case growing out of the same violence, which also targeted Christian homes, continues in court.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Huma Tahir & Iffat Tahira, Freedom of Religion and Status of Religious Minorities in Pakistan, (International Journal of Management Sciences and Business Research, Vol. 5, Issue 12, Dec. 2016).
• Elizabeth Sepper, The Role of Religion in State Public Accommodations Laws, (60 St. Louis University Law Journal, Forthcoming).
• Valentino Cattelan, Legal Pluralism, Property Rights and the Paradigm of Islamic Economics, (JKAU: Islamic Economics, 30 (1) (2017)).
• John Witte & Joel A. Nichols, 'Come Now Let Us Reason Together’: Restoring Religious Freedom in America and Abroad, (Notre Dame Law Review, 92:1, 2016).
• John Witte, “Foreword,” to Rafael Domingo, God and the Secular Legal System, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016), ix-xii).
• Dimitry Gegenava, Recognition of the Religious Marriage in Georgian Legislative Reality, (Journal of Law, #1, 2015).
• Seema Mohapatra, Assisted Reproduction Inequality and Marriage Equality, (Chicago-Kent Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Jessica A. Clarke, Protected Class Gatekeeping, (New York University Law Review, Vol. 92, No. 1, 2017).

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Aguilar v. Lemke, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2526 (ND IL, Jan. 5, 2017), an Illinois federal district court allowed an inmate to move ahead with his claim that his placement in segregation in violation of his due process rights resulted in restrictions on his ability to practice his Roman Catholic religion.

In Garrett v. Stephens, (5th Cir., Jan 12, 2017), the 5th Circuit upheld dismissal of an inmate's claim that confiscation of his property forced him to modify his daily religious practices.

In Sareini v. Burnett, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3083 (ED MI, Jan. 10, 2017), a Michigan federal district court held that the Supreme Court's 2015 decision in Holt v. Hobbs is not a basis for reopening a court's 2011 dismissal of an inmate's religious items and holiday claims.

In Santos v. Holland, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3682 (ED CA, Jan. 10, 2016), a California federal magistrate judge, ruling on an inmate's habeas corpus petition, recommended concluding that a state court was reasonable when it held that an inmate's free exercise rights were not violated by using his religious necklace with the Eternal Warrior Shield as evidence of affiliation with the Mexican Mafia.

In Skandha v. Spencer, 2017 Mass. App. Unpub. LEXIS 45 (MA App., Jan. 12, 2017), a Massachusetts state appeals court rejected an inmate's claim that his religious rights were violated by the requirement that he sign a diet sheet in advance of receiving a vegan meal.

In Faulker v. Phillips, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 181805 (SD CA, Dec. 2, 2016), a California federal magistrate judge recommended that an inmate's complaint that he was denied a kosher diet be dismissed on various grounds, with one narrow exception.

In Blair v. Thompson, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5164 (WD KY, Jan. 13, 2017), a Kentucky federal district court dismissed an inmate's claim of a conspiracy to interfere with the practice of his religion by stealing, moving, and destroying his religious materials.

In Venkataram v. Bureau of Prisons, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5418 (SD FL, Jan. 12, 2017), a Florida federal magistrate judge recommended that a Hindu inmate be permitted to proceed with his claim seeking declaratory relief that his 1st Amendment and RLUIPA rights were infringed by the failure to provide him a vegetarian diet prepared and served in accordance with his religious beliefs.

In Gonzalez v. Rivera, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4612 (ED AR, Jan. 12, 2017), an Arkansas federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 181873, Dec. 16, 2016) and permitted an inmate to proceed with his complaint that he was not given meatless meals on Good Friday and that Catholic Easter services were not available even though they were proved to Protestant prisoners.

In Stein v. Mohr, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 181896 (SD OH, Dec. 13, 2016), an Ohio federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 181898, Dec. 6, 2016) and dismissed an inmate's complaint that he was not placed on the list to attend the Asatru religious feast of Yule, that he was not allowed to make a copy of a religious poster, and that the chapel library had only 3 Asatru religious books and they were subsequently stolen.

Indiana RFRA Not Defense To Tax Evasion

In Tyms-Bey v. State of Indiana, (IN App., Jan. 13, 2017), an Indiana appeals court, in a 2-1 decision, held that a state RFRA defense cannot be raised in a tax evasion prosecution.  According to the majority opinion:

as a matter of law ..., in the context of Indiana’s RFRA, there is a compelling governmental interest in collecting income tax revenue. Moreover, we hold as a matter of law that the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling interest is uniform and mandatory participation in the income tax system. There are no facts that [defendant] could proffer with respect to his exercise of religion that would not be overcome by the State’s compelling interest and the means used by the State in furthering that interest. 

Judge Najam dissenting said in part:

Tyms-Bey’s alleged RFRA defense may ultimately not succeed, but he is entitled to his day in court. The majority’s holding that, in effect, Tyms-Bey has not stated a claim under RFRA and that he is not even entitled to present evidence in support of his alleged defense is too quick to dispose of Tyms-Bey’s claim and denies him the particularized adjudication that is expressly afforded to him by Indiana’s RFRA.

NJ Court Upholds Historic Preservation Funds To Churches In State Constitutional Challenge

In Freedom From Religion Foundation v. Morris County Board of Chosen Freeholders, (NJ Super., Jan 9, 2017), a New Jersey trial court upheld a county's allowing churches to be among those receiving grants from the county's Historic Preservation Trust Fund.  Even though Art. 1, Par. 3 of the New Jersey Constitution prohibits the use of tax funds to build or repair any church or place of worship, the court said that the constitutional provision "is not meant to be read literally" but must be read "in conjunction with the State's longstanding tradition of neutrality in church-state relations...." The Daily Record reports on the decision.