House Task Force On Anti-Semitism Sends Suggestions To Trump

Yesterday the eight co-chairs of the U.S. House of Representatives Bipartisan Task Force for Combating Anti-Semitism sent a letter (full text) to President Trump suggesting three specific steps to improve the government's response to anti-Semitism:

Ensure that the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice has access to the necessary resources and information to fully investigate alleged anti-Semitic crimes and ensure the perpetrators are brought to justice.

Ensure that a mechanism exists to coordinate inter-agency detection of and response to new anti-Semitic crimes.

Evaluate growing anti-Semitism online, particularly incitement to violence, and devise a comprehensive policy response.

Times of Israel reports on the letter.

2nd Circuit Hears Arguments On Whether Money Damages Are Available Under RFRA

The U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday heard oral arguments (MP3 audio of full arguments) in Tanvir v. Comey.  In the case, Muslim plaintiffs sued claiming that when they refused to become FBI informants, partly because doing so would violate their religious beliefs, the government retaliated by placing them on the No-Fly List.  The district court held that RFRA does not provide for money damages against federal officers in their personal capacities. (See prior posting.) Courthouse News Service reports on the oral arguments in the appeal of that decision.

Religious Coalitions Take Contrasting Positions As Amici In Transgender Bathroom Case

Broad coalitions of religious groups have, through amicus briefs, now weighed in on opposite sides of the battle over transgender rights and Title IX that will be argued before the U.S. Supreme Court on March 28 in Gloucester County School Board v. G.G.(SCOTUSblog case page).  A brief (full text) filed in January by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops; Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations;  National Association of Evangelicals; Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention; The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints; The Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod; and Christian Legal Society argues in part:

Major religious traditions—including those represented by amici—share the belief that a person’s identity as male or female is created by God and immutable. That belief is contradicted by the U.S. Department of Education’s interpretation of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, 20 U.S.C. § 1681(a)....

Interpreting Title IX’s prohibition on sex discrimination as an implicit ban on gender identity discrimination would undermine the ability of religious organizations to govern their own institutions consistent with their tenets. Maintaining religious schools, colleges, and universities that reflect the faith of their sponsoring religious organizations would be in jeopardy. But also, because federal civil rights laws for employment and housing contain the same prohibition on sex discrimination as Title IX, a misstep in this case could threaten religious liberty across a broad range of circumstances, including employment, housing, and public accommodations.

Meanwhile, a brief (full text) filed yesterday on behalf of 15 religious organizations (Protestant, Jewish and Muslim) and more than 1800 faith leaders took a different position, arguing in part:

The arguments of religious amici supporting Petitioner are ultimately not about religious freedom at all. A high school boy simply wanting to use the same restroom as his classmates at a public school poses no threat to anyone’s religious exercise or expression. Rather, these religious actors seek to enforce a kind of religious orthodoxy that rejects the fundamental existence and dignity of transgender persons. Permitting such religious views to inform the scope of civil rights law enforcement would violate the Establishment Clause both by enshrining religion in secular law and by favoring particular religious views and the views of particular institutions over those espoused by the undersigned Amici.

Huffington Post has more on this brief.

Krishna Community Reaches Agreement Over Pipeline Route On Sacred Land

As reported by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, last Tuesday a lawsuit was filed in federal district court in West Virginia by the New Vrindaban Krishna community claiming that the proposed shale gas Rover Pipeline will cut through sacred property that holds two of the community's seven sacred temples. But The Intelligencer reports that as a hearing date arrived the parties engaged in negotiations and yesterday it was announced by the pipeline developers that an agreement had been reached. An Energy Transfer Partners spokeswoman said:

We were able to agree on compensation for the right of way and most importantly, agree on minor route changes that avoided all sacred sites and mitigated any impact to the environment.  This is the result of all parties being willing to come together to openly and effectively communicate to solve an issue. This clearly demonstrates that infrastructure and sacred sites can co-exist in this country.

Survivor Resigns In Protest From Pontifical Commission On Protecting Minors

In a written statement yesterday, Marie Collins announced that she has resigned in protest from Pope Francis' Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors.  As reported by National Catholic Reporter, Collins was one of two clergy sex abuse survivors appointed to the Commission in 2014.  The other abuse victim member was placed on leave last year because of friction with other Commission members. The only other abuse survivor on the Commission, Englishman Peter Saunders, took a leave of absence last year after friction over his criticisms of the Pope.  In her statement yesterday explaining her resignation, Marie Collins said in part:

The reluctance of some in the Vatican Curia to implement recommendations or cooperate with the work of a commission when the purpose is to improve the safety of children and vulnerable adults around the world is unacceptable....

The last straw for me, on top of the refusal to cooperate on the Safeguarding Guidelines, has been the refusal, by the same dicastery, to implement one of the simplest recommendations the Commission has put forward to date.

Last year at our request, the pope instructed all departments in the Vatican to ensure all correspondence from victims/survivors receives a response. I learned in a letter from this particular dicastery last month that they are refusing to do so.

Suit Says City Misled Public About Scope of Ordinance Adding LGBT Protections

Liberty Counsel announced yesterday that it has filed a lawsuit challenging the validity of recent amendments to the Jacksonville, Florida Human Rights Ordinance.  The complaint (full text) in Parsons v. City of Jacksonville, Florida, (FL Cir. Ct., filed 3/1/2017), alleges that amendments adding "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" to the "protected categories" in the Jacksonville's existing nondiscrimination laws were improperly adopted.  Florida state law provides:

No ordinance shall be revised or amended by reference to its title only. Ordinances to revise or amend shall set out in full the revised or amended act or section or subsection or paragraph of a section or subsection.

The new lawsuit contends that the amendments to the Human Rights Ordinance failed to set out the provisions that were being amended, and charges that "the violations result from the intentional omission of plain and obvious legal requirements, by the ordinance authors and sponsors, to deceive the Jacksonville public, City Council, and Mayor as to the true contents and scope of the HRO."

Suit Over Priest's Breach of Confessional Secrecy Is Dismissed

In Sonnier v. Roman Catholic Diocese of Lafayette, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26498 (WD LA, Feb. 23, 2017), a Louisiana federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27235, Jan. 18. 2017) and dismissed an action alleging invasion of privacy and defamation brought by a member of a Catholic church who claimed that a priest violated his 1st Amendment rights by disclosing plaintiff's use of the confessional to communicate with individuals involved in a civil litigation matter. The court concluded that the 1st Amendment does not apply because no state actor was involved in the conduct.  The court went on to hold that in addition:

Plaintiff's claims fall within the scope of internal religious affairs as they are predicated on: (1) the breach of the sacramental seal of confession, as defined by the Roman Catholic Church; and (2) Bishop Jarrell's failure to remedy the breach in accordance with church doctrine. In order to discern whether Plaintiff has asserted meritorious claims against Defendants, the Court would have to interpret church doctrine relating to the sacrament of confession and otherwise encroach upon the internal affairs of the Roman Catholic Church. Application of long-standing First Amendment jurisprudence, therefore, mandates that this Court refrain from considering Plaintiff's claims.

6th Circuit Grants En Banc Review In Legislative Prayer Case

The U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals on Feb. 27 granted en banc review in Bormuth v. County of Jackson.  In the case, a 3-judge panel in a 2-1 decision held that the manner in which the Jackson County, Michigan Board of Commissioners opens its meetings with prayer violates the Establishment Clause.  AP reports on the grant of review by the full court which has the effect of vacating the panel decision while review is pending. [Thanks to Tom Rutledge for the lead.]

Supreme Court Clerk Chastises Amici For Wording In Brief On Transgender Rights

Over three dozen amicus briefs have been filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in Gloucester County School Board v. G.G.  At issue is whether Title IX requires schools to allow transgender students to use bathrooms consistent with their gender identity.  Slate reports that letters dated Feb. 24 from the Clerk of the Supreme Court (full text 1, 2) to two amici supporting petitioners have chastised them for referring to the transgender male student involved as "her."  The Clerk wrote Liberty Counsel and Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence saying:

... the covers of your amicus briefs in this case identify the respondent as “G.G., by her next friend and mother, Deirdre Grimm.” In fact, the caption for the case in this Court, as in the lower courts, identifies the respondent as “G.G., by his Next Friend and Mother, Deirdre Grimm.”  (Emphasis added.) Under Rule 34, your cover is to reflect the caption of the case. Please ensure careful compliance with this requirement in this and other cases in the future.

Pakistan Supreme Court Takes Action Against Fraudulent Hajj Tour Operators

In Hussain v. State, (Pakistan Sup. Ct., Feb. 27, 2017), the Supreme Court of Pakistan denied bail to defendants charged with defrauding a large number of Muslims seeking to perform Hajj by creating a fake travel agency that absconded with their travel funds. The Court explained:

This nature of frauds have become so common that, every year, before the Hajj Season commences, innocent and rustic peoples are looted by various so called agencies including the unauthorized tour operators, of which judicial notice is required to be taken to curb the increasing menace of frauds practiced in religious and pious matters, therefore, Courts are required to treat these cases differently and such frauds must be brought to halt.

The Court strongly criticized government agencies for failing to enforce the law and "allow[ing] the fraudsters to commit such crimes with impunity." In an attempt to prevent such frauds in the future, the Court ordered the Ministry of Religious Affairs

to update its website in English, Urdu and all local languages, conveniently readable and understandable by the illiterate poor people, showing all the details about the duly approved Hajj & Umrah Tour Operators, warning the public at large that except those mentioned on the website, no other agency or Tour & Hajj Operator is authorized to make booking or collect money for sending people to perform Hajj or Umrah. At the same time, the said Ministry shall give wide publicity to such lists through electronic and print media and also through handbills/notifications in different languages....

The Court also ordered further disclosures to travelers and indemnity bonds by authorized Hajj tour operators.  Today's Express Tribune reports on the decision.

Catholic High School Loses Ministerial Exception Defense In Suit By Former Teacher

Monrovia Patch reports that a California state trial court has rejected the ministerial exception defense raised by a Glendora, California Catholic high school in a suit by a former teacher who was fired for marrying his same-sex partner shortly after the U.S. Supreme Court's Obergefell decision.  The court ruled that Kenneth Bencomo can move ahead with his wrongful termination, Labor Code and breach of contract claims against St. Lucy's Priority High School.  The court ruled that while the high school is a religious institution, Bencomo produced substantial evidence that that did not teach any religious classes.  He taught only studio art, dance, English and yearbook and magazine courses. The school did not require that religion be part of his classes, and he never led prayers or referenced Catholic doctrine.

Muslim Organization Gets Rulings In Its Favor In Zoning Challenge

In an opinion covering two suits-- one by a Sufi Muslim religious organization and the other by the United States--, an Illinois federal district court concluded that the city of Des Plaines, Illinois may well have violated RLUIPA and the 1st and 14th Amendments, as well as state law, in denying a zoning amendment that would allow the Muslim group to use property it had purchased for religious and educational purposes.  In Society of American Bosnians and Herzegovinians v. City of DesPlaines, (ND IL, Feb. 26, 2017), the court denied summary judgment to both sides, but concluded that a reasonable fact finder could infer that the City imposed a substantial burden on the religious organization's free exercise of religion and that the city's parking concerns did not constitute a compelling interest. The court also concluded that the city violated RLUIPA's equal terms provision, and that there is a genuine dispute on whether the city acted with discriminatory intent. Cook County Record reports on the decision.

Cert. Denied In Church Retirement Plan Fiduciary Duty Case

The U.S. Supreme Court today denied review in Evangelical Lutheran Church v. Bacon (Docket No. 16-910, cert. denied 2/27/2017). (Order List.)  In the case, a Minnesota state court of appeals held that the First Amendment does not prevent a civil court from adjudicating a challenge to the manner in which the Lutheran Church retirement plans were managed. Plan participants claimed breach of fiduciary duty, breach of trust, and fraud and concealment in the administration and management of the Plans. (See prior posting.)

Canada's Supreme Court Will Review Two Trinity Western Law School Cases

On Feb. 23, the Supreme Court of Canada agreed to hear appeals in Trinity Western University v. Law Society of Upper Canada (Ontario) (summary of case) and Law Society of British Columbia v. Trinity Western University, et. al. (British Columbia) (summary of case). At issue is the question of whether the Law Societies in various provinces can refuse to accredit Trinity Western University Law School because of its code of conduct based on evangelical Christian teachings.  In particular, the law school refuses to recognize same-sex marriages and requires students to sign its Community Covenant that, among other things, prohibits sexual intimacy outside of a marriage between one man and one woman. TaxProf Blog has more on the Supreme Court's action. [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

Kashmir Court Employees Must Offer Regular Prayers At Proper Time To Get Raises

According to WIO News, the new Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan-Occupied-Kashmir has told court employees that their annual salary increases will turn on their offering prayers regularly and at the prescribed times. Ibrahim Zia, who was sworn in Saturday as Chief Justice, instructed that offering prayers is now mandatory for all court employees.  He also told employees they must work with dedication, honesty and regularity to ensure speedy justice to the public.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Satvinder Juss, Back to the Future: Justiciability, Religion, and the Figment of 'Judicial No-Man's Land', (Public Law Issue 2, April 2016, pp. 198-206).
• John D. Inazu, Law, Religion, and the Purpose of the University, (Washington University Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Giulia Capacci, In Vitro Fertilization, the Catholic Church and National Survival: The Discursive Construction of Reproductive Rights in Poland, (February 3, 2017).
• Barbara P. Billauer, The Secrets of Jethro - Father of Jurisprudence, Patriarch of the Druze, Unifier of Legal Systems, (February 21, 2017).
• Thomas J. McSweeney, Salvation by Statute: Magna Carta, Legislation, and the King's Soul, (William & Mary Bill of Rights, Vol. 25, No. 2, 2016).

From SmartCILP:

• Deepa Das Acevedo, Temples, Courts, and Dynamic Equilibrium in the Indian Constitution, 64 American Journal of Comparative Law 555-581 (2016).
• Shlomo Pill, Jewish Law Antecedents to American Constitutional Thought, [Abstract], 85 Mississippi Law Journal 643-696 (2016).
• Lua Kamal Yuille, Creating a Babel Fish for Rights & Religion: Defining 'Rights' Through Sacred Texts, [Abstract], 25 Transnational Law & Contemporary Problems 309-361 (2016).
• Nelson Tebbe. McElroy Lecture. How To Think About Religious Freedom In an Egalitarian Age, [Abstract], 3 University of Detroit Mercy Law Review 353-367 (2016).
• Symposium: Global Legal and Religious Perspectives on Elder Care. Introduction by Amy Zeittlow and Naomi Cahn; articles by Israel (Issi) Doron, Charles Foster, M. Christian Green, Nancy J. Knauer, Thomas G. Long, Rabbi Edith M. Meyerson, Diane E. Meier, Allison Kestenbaum, Rahimjon Abdugafurov, Beverly Moran and Xing Guang. 31 Journal of Law & Religion 115-226 (2016). 

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Heyer v. U.S. Bureau of  Prisons, (4th Cir., Feb. 23, 2017), the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals allowed a deaf inmate to move ahead with his claim that his free exercise rights were infringed by failure to provide him a sign-language interpreter for religious services.

In Crowder v. Lariva, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23687 (SD IN, Feb. 21, 2017), an Indiana federal district court held that a prison chaplain who was sued by a Hebrew-Israelite inmate demonstrated that there is a genuine dispute of fact as to whether the denial of plaintiff's requests for a kosher diet substantially burdened his right to practice his religion because he continued to purchase non-kosher items from the commissary.

In Pruitt v. Williams, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25044 (ED AR, Feb. 23, 2017), an Arkansas federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25468, Feb. 2, 2017) and dismissed an inmate's complaint that as a form of punishment he was denied the right to practice his religion.

In Ali v. Haese, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25431 (ED WI, Feb. 23, 2017), a Wisconsin federal district court allowed an inmate to proceed on his claim that he was denied participation in the 2016 Ramadan fast, but not due process and retaliation claims added in his amended complaint.

The FBI and Religion Is Studied

Salon today has posted an interesting article titled How the FBI Is Hobbled by Religious Illiteracy.  Much of it is an interview with University of Pennsylvania Prof. Steven Weitzman.  Introducing the interview, interviewer Emma Green says in part:

The story of the FBI and religion is not a series of isolated mishaps, argues a new book of essays edited by Steven Weitzman, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania, and Sylvester A. Johnson, a professor at Northwestern University. Over its 109 years of existence, these historians and their colleagues argue, the Bureau has shaped American religious history through targeted investigations and religiously tinged rhetoric about national security.

At times, the Bureau has operated according to an explicit vision of protecting Christianity, as it did during the tenure of J. Edgar Hoover, the longtime director of the FBI. But in other cases, it has operated with religious ignorance.

Handling of Vaccination Exemption Request Did Not Violate Religious Rights

In Nikolao v. Lyon, (ED MI, Feb. 23, 2017), a Michigan federal district court dismissed free exercise and establishment clause challenges to the manner in which the Wayne County, Michigan Health Department handled a mother's request for an exemption for her children from the public school vaccination requirement.  Michigan law permits an exemption on the basis of a parent's religious convictions or alternatively on the basis other objections to  immunization. A 2014 Administrative Rule added the requirement that before an exemption will be granted, the parent must receive education  from the local health department on the risks of not receiving vaccinations.  The health department has prepared materials for its employees to use in attempting to persuade parents to allow vaccination, including materials to counter religious objections.

Plaintiff claims that if she wanted a religious waiver, she was required to explain her religious beliefs and discuss them with a health department nurse.  When she refused, she was granted an exemption on the non-religious ground that "mom wants child to have natural immunity."  Plaintiff contended that this deprived her of her religious and moral responsibility to object on account of her religion. Rejecting plaintiff's free exercise claim, the court said:

At most what Plaintiff alleges is that she was exposed to “coercion” to violate her beliefs regarding immunization for her children and “filled with lies about her faith from health department employees.” Plaintiff, however, did not yield to the nurses’ alleged pressure or lies and agree to immunize her children. She left the health department with the required and completed immunization waiver forms.

No Religious Discrimination In Suspension of Minister's Gym Membership

In Armstrong v. James Madison University, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25014 (WD VA, Feb. 23, 2017), a Virginia federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing claims of religious discrimination and infringement of free exercise rights brought by Matthew Armstrong, a 65-year old Christian minister, after his alumnus membership in James Madison University Recreation gym was suspended. The suspension followed a complaint filed by a female student employee of the gym who claimed that comments made to her by Armstrong amounted to sexual harassment. Armstrong had told the student about his religious beliefs that allowed him to have a young wife, and asked her if she would be interested in getting to know him better with the eventual possibility of marriage.

Arkansas Supreme Court Invalidates City's LGBT Anti-Discrimination Law

In Protect Fayetteville v. City of Fayetteville, (AR Sup. Ct., Feb. 23, 2017), the Arkansas Supreme Court held that the City of Fayetteville is precluded by state statute from extending its anti-discrimination provisions to protect lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals. The Arkansas' Intrastate Commerce Improvement Act provides:

A county, municipality, or other political subdivision of the state shall not adopt or enforce an ordinance, resolution, rule, or policy that creates a protected classification or prohibits discrimination on a basis not contained in state law.

Fayetteville claimed that its expanded non-discrimination law is permitted because state laws on bullying, domestic abuse shelters and amendment of birth certificates include reference to sexual orientation and gender identity. The Court held, however, that municipalities are precluded from providing non-discrimination protection to categories beyond race, religion, national origin, gender and disability that are included in the Arkansas Civil Rights Act of 1993.  Arkansas Matters reports on the decision.

Oklahoma Supreme Court Says Church Autonomy Shields Suit Over Publicity of Baptism

In a 5-3 decision in Doe v. First Presbyterian Church USA of Tulsa, (OK Sup. Ct., Feb. 22, 2017), the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled that the church autonomy doctrine requires dismissal of a suit by a Muslim convert to Christianity challenging the church's online publicity of his baptism. Plaintiff traveled to Syria after the baptism where he allegedly was kidnapped and tortured by radical Muslims who threatened to carry out a death sentence for apostasy.  The majority framed the issue as one of whether publication of the baptism on the internet is an act rooted in religious belief so that it falls within the church's ecclesiastical jurisdiction.  The majority concluded:

The context of the online posting of Appellant's baptism is not secular. Appellant's tort claims all rest on an act that, per church doctrine, is an integral part of what the church considers to be the public nature of the sacrament. Because Appellant's tort claims arise from the performance of his baptism, this dispute is one over ecclesiastical rule, custom or law, and is not purely secular.....

Justices Gurich and Kauger disagreed, saying in part:

The present case does not involve a question of discipline, faith, or ecclesiastical rule decided by a church tribunal, nor does it involve an internal, administrative matter. It merely involves the Church's publication of Appellant's name on the internet. No judicial body in the Church rendered any decision that Appellant is now trying to relitigate in civil court, and ... the autonomy of an internal Church disciplinary process is not threatened. Moreover [this suit] ... satisfies an exception to the church autonomy doctrine [for serious threats to public safety, peace or order].

AP reports on the decision. (See prior related posting.)

Belgian Court Rules Kosher Slaughter Is Protected Religious Right

Jerusalem Post reported yesterday that a court in Belgium has ruled that restricting kosher slaughtering of animals "excessively and unreasonably restricts freedom of religion and seriously harms the fundamental laws of human rights and religious rights in Belgium."  The Conference of European Rabbis announced yesterday that the constitutional court of Belgium’s southern Wallonia region handed down the ruling after several legislators in the parliament of Wallonia introduced legislation to subject kosher slaughtering to the general requirement of Belgian law that animals be stunned before slaughter. [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

NJ Tax Court Says Church Had Not Stopped Using Area For Religious Purposes

In Holy Trinity Baptist Church v. City of Trenton Block 26802, Lot 4, (NJ Tax Ct., Feb. 7, 2017), the New Jersey Tax Court held that the County Board of Taxation was wrong in concluding the the second floor of a church building was no longer being used for religious or charitable purposes. The court said in part:

the evidence as a whole shows that the second floor was being used for the Church's youth and member meetings albeit on a declining level due to the plaintiff's acquisition of another property. The declining frequency of such events or the undisputed fact that the Subject was being offered for sale, and the second floor was being prepared for such sale, do not establish non-use or abandonment of use of the second floor for plaintiff's tax exempt purposes.

JD Supra Business Advisor has analysis of the decision.

Settlements In Mosque's and DOJ's Suits Against Michigan City

Detroit Free Press reported yesterday that settlements have been reached in two related lawsuits against the city of Sterling Heights, Michigan over the city's denial of Special Approval Land Use application that would have allowed the American Islamic Community Center to construct a mosque on five adjoining lots in the city. One suit was brought by the Islamic Center, while the other was filed by the Department of Justice. (See prior posting.)  The settlement requires the city to allow the mosque to be built, but calls for the height of the mosque's dome and spires to be reduced by approximately two feet. No amplified outdoor sound-- including the Muslim call for prayer-- will be permitted.  Parking will be allowed only in the mosque's parking lot.  The financial arrangements in the Islamic Center's suit are unclear.  The settlement calls for the city to pay a $350,000 deductible to its insurance carrier. A Department of Justice press release yesterday says that the settlement also calls for the city to publicize its nondiscrimination policies, undergo RLUIPA training, and report periodically to the Department of Justice. The settlements must still be approved by the court.

Trump Administration Withdraws Obama Title IX Transgender Guidance

Today the Trump Administration withdrew the controversial Obama Administration's Guidance on rights of transgender students under Title IX. In a Joint Letter (full text) from the Department of Justice and Department of Education, the Trump Administration formally took no position on whether Title IX protects transgender students.  The Letter reads in part:

These [Obama Administration] guidance documents take the position that the prohibitions on discrimination “on the basis of sex” in Title IX ... and its implementing regulations ... require access to sex-segregated facilities based on gender identity. These guidance documents do not, however, contain extensive legal analysis or explain how the position is consistent with the express language of Title IX, nor did they undergo any formal public process.

This interpretation has given rise to significant litigation regarding school restrooms and locker rooms....

In addition, the Departments believe that, in this context, there must be due regard for the primary role of the States and local school districts in establishing educational policy.

In these circumstances, the Department of Education and the Department of Justice have decided to withdraw and rescind the above-referenced guidance documents in order to further and more completely consider the legal issues involved. The Departments thus will not rely on the views expressed within them.

The Solicitor General's Office also sent a letter (full text) to the Supreme Court notifying it of the Guidance withdrawal.  Oral argument is scheduled March 28 in the Gloucester County School Board case involving the Obama Administration's interpretation of Title IX.  The Supreme Court specifically granted certiorari on two issues (see prior posting), only one of which would appear to be mooted by yesterday's action.  The two issues are:

... [S]hould deference extend to an unpublished agency letter that, among other things, does not carry the force of law and was adopted in the context of the very dispute in which deference is sought?

... With or without deference to the agency, should the Department’s specific interpretation of Title IX and 34 C.F.R. § 106.33 be given effect?

The New York Times reports that Education Secretary Betsy DeVos had opposed withdrawal of the Guidance that protected transgender students, but that the President sided with Attorney General Sessions.  The new Joint Letter does contain a paragraph expressing concern for student rights:

Please note that this withdrawal of these guidance documents does not leave students without protections from discrimination, bullying, or harassment. All schools must ensure that all students, including LGBT students, are able to learn and thrive in a safe environment. The Department of Education Office for Civil Rights will continue its duty under law to hear all claims of discrimination and will explore every appropriate opportunity to protect all students and to encourage civility in our classrooms. The Department of Education and the Department of Justice are committed to the application of Title IX and other federal laws to ensure such protection.

Both Attorney General Sessions and Secretary DeVos issued separate statements as well.  Sessions' statement (full text) reads in part:

The Department of Justice remains committed to the proper interpretation and enforcement of Title IX and to its protections for all students, including LGBTQ students, from discrimination, bullying, and harassment.

DeVos' statement (full text) reads in part:

I have dedicated my career to advocating for and fighting on behalf of students, and as Secretary of Education, I consider protecting all students, including LGBTQ students, not only a key priority for the Department, but for every school in America.

Today's Joint Letter only refers to the interpretation of Title IX.  It is unclear how this will affect the similar interpretation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.  The EEOC has interpreted the reference to sex discrimination in Title VII to protect transgender employees. Indeed, a December 15, 2014 Memorandum (full text) from Attorney General Holder to U.S. Attorneys takes the same position on Title VII.

French Presidential Candidate Le Pen Refuses To Wear Headscarf To Meet With Lebanese Grand Mufti

In French presidential elections, far-right National Front party leader Marine Le Pen leads in the polls for the April 23 first round, as national security has become the leading concern of voters. As of now, polls show Le Pen losing in the May runoff.  (AlJazeera, Bloomberg)  Le Pen has just completed a three-day trip to Lebanon where she attracted news attention when she refused to wear a headscarf for a meeting with the country's highest Sunni cleric.  According to an AP report:

The headscarf incident occurred ahead of a scheduled meeting with Lebanon's grand mufti, Sheikh Abdel-Latif Derian.

Shortly after Le Pen arrived at his office, one of his aides handed her a white headscarf to put on. Following a discussion with his aides that lasted a few minutes, she refused and returned to her car.

Le Pen told reporters:  "I consider the headscarf a symbol of a woman's submission. I will not put on the veil."

British Appeals Court Refuses To Extend Civil Partnerships To Heterosexual Couples

In Steinfeld & Keidan v Secretary of State for Education, (EWCA, Feb. 21, 2017), Britain's Court of Appeal, in a 2-1 decision, rejected a challenge to British law that allows same-sex couples, but not opposite-sex couples, to enter civil partnerships as an alternative to marriage.  The differential treatment was challenged as a violation of the European Convention on Human Rights prohibition on discrimination (Article 14) and right to respect for private and family life (Article 8). As explained in the Court's Summary of the decision, all of the judges agreed that the ban on civil partnerships for opposite-sex couples creates a potential violation of Articles 14 and 8.  However two of the three judges concluded that the limitation is permissible because it is in pursuit of a legitimate aim and is proportionate.  The Secretary of State is taking further time to assess whether, since the introduction of same-sex marriage, civil partnership should be phased out or should instead be extended to opposite-sex couples. CNN reports on the decision.

In Settlement, School Will Remove Ten Commandments Monument

The Freedom From Religion Foundation announced yesterday that it has reached a successful settlement with a Pennsylvania school district in FFRF's suit seeking removal of a 6-foot tall Ten Commandments monument from a high school's lawn. The settlement agreement (full text) in Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. v. New Kensington Arnold School District provides that the school district will remove the monument within 30 days of the effective date of the settlement agreement.  The school district's insurance company will also pay plaintiffs' attorneys fees and costs of $163,500.  The suit, originally filed in 2012, went to the 3rd Circuit last year which upheld standing of at least some of the plaintiffs to bring the lawsuit. (See prior posting.)

Administrative Law Judge Sues Over Requirement To Watch LGBT Diversity Training Video

According to yesterday's Houston Press, a Social Security Administrative Law Judge has filed a federal court lawsuit claiming religious discrimination after the agency refused to accede to his religious objections to viewing a 17-minute LGBT diversity training video.  In the lawsuit, ALJ Gary Suttles claims that the refusal by the Houston office's chief administrative law judge to grant him a religious accommodation and her insistence that he watch or read a transcript of the video created a hostile work environment.

Amish Drop Suit Against City Over Animal Waste Requirements

Bowling Green (KY) Daily News reported yesterday that two members of the Swartzentruber Amish community who had sued Auburn, Kentucky officials over an animal waste ordinance requiring horses to wear animal waste catching devices have now voluntarily dismissed their lawsuit. The sect's elders had ruled that it violates religious principles to comply with the requirement. (See prior posting.) Even though efforts to reach a compromise in the suit failed, plaintiffs dismissed their suit because of their discomfort with the publicity they were receiving.

Trump Responds To Anti-Semitic Incidents In U.S.

President Trump today in remarks (full text) after touring the National Museum of African American History and Culture gave his most explicit denunciation of the increasing number of anti-Semitic incidents in the U.S. in recent weeks.  He said:

This tour was a meaningful reminder of why we have to fight bigotry, intolerance and hatred in all of its very ugly forms.  The anti-Semitic threats targeting our Jewish community and community centers are horrible and are painful, and a very sad reminder of the work that still must be done to root out hate and prejudice and evil.

As reported by CNN, Trump's remarks come after 54 Jewish Community Centers in the U.S. and Canada have received 69 bomb threats. Also today, it was disclosed that more than 100 headstones at a Jewish cemetery near St. Louis were recently damaged or toppled. (CNN). The President has been criticized for his less than direct responses in two previous news conferences to questions about anti-Semitism. (e.g. Baltimore Sun editorial). Responding to the President's statement, American Jewish Committee tweeted: "Now we look forward to your plan of action."

Illinois Conversion Therapy Ban Does Not Apply To Religious Pastoral Counseling

In Pastors Protecting Youth v. Madigan, (ND IL, Feb. 15, 2017), an Illinois federal district court held that Illinois' Youth Mental Health Protection Act restricting conversion therapy does not apply to religious pastoral counseling.  The Act bars mental health providers from offering conversion therapy to minors, and prohibits anyone from deceptively offering conversion therapy in trade or commerce. The court concluded that private religious counseling is not "trade or commerce". The Act was intended to apply only to mental health professionals or to those who deceptively advertise conversion therapy for commercial purposes. Christian News reports on the decision.

Texas High School Rules Force Transgender Male Wrestler To Compete In Girl's League

In Texas, high school athletics is governed by the University Interscholastic League (UIL). Rules of the UIL require student-athletes to compete as the gender listed on their birth certificate.  Another rule specifically prohibits boys from wrestling girls. AP reported this week on Mack Beggs, a transgender high schooler who is transitioning from female to male who, under these rules, is required to compete as a female. Beggs won the high school regional wrestling competition after her opponent forfeited rather than wrestle Beggs. Beggs is taking testosterone as part of her transitioning. Earlier this month, the parent of another wrestler filed a lawsuit against the UIL seeking to have Beggs disqualified for using steroids, saying that allowing Beggs to wrestle girls creates a risk of bodily harm.  The Texas Education Code allows steroid use when administered by a medical practitioner for a valid medical purpose.

Bob Jones University To Regain Tax Exempt Status

The State reported last week that Bob Jones University, will regain its tax exempt status on March 1, nearly 34 years after the U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld stripping it of the exempt status.  The revocation stemmed from the University's policy, which at the time it claimed was Biblically-based, to deny admission to applicants engaged in an interracial marriage or known to advocate interracial marriage or dating.  The conservative Christian university dropped its interracial dating policy in 2000, but did not take steps to begin to regain full tax exempt status until 2014. It had previously created certain non-profit arms, such as its scholarship fund.  But now a reorganization will place most of the university's facilities under the umbrella of its existing BJU, Inc. (formerly Bob Jones elementary School, Inc.).  Some assets however will remain in a for-profit entity.  This reorganization did not require formal IRS approval, but the University has had formal correspondence and conversations with IRS about the reorganization.  One of the benefits of the reorganization will be that the University will move from a for-profit to a non-profit college as the Department of Education is giving added oversight to for-profit institutions. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Catholic Fringe Group Pushes Right-Wing Agenda

Yesterday's Detroit Free Press carries a lengthy feature article on the Ferndale, Michigan-based organization "Church Militant" which the report describes as:

a growing, Catholic fringe group hoping the forces that elected President Donald Trump will tear down the wall between church and state.

The report continues:

Church Militant broadcasts pro-life, anti-gay, anti-feminist, Islam-fearing, human-caused-climate-change-denying orthodox Catholic news on its website churchmiltant.com and through social media using high-tech, professional production studios that rival those at local TV news stations. It has 35 full-time employees (and is hiring more) who publish about 10 stories and three videos every weekday.

Its leader, Michael Voris, has compared Trump with Constantine, the Roman emperor whom he says was "not a moral man" but a "power-hungry egomaniac," but who saw it desirable to end the persecution of Christians. He was a human vessel who elevated Catholicism to the state religion, Voris said.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• William L. Saunders, Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain, Kim Colby, William P. Marshall & Robin Fretwell Wilson, Religious Liberty after Hobby Lobby: A Panel of the 2014 Federalist Society National Lawyers Convention, (Connecticut Law Review, Vol. 48, No. 3, 2016).
• Lucia Ann Silecchia, Rejecting a View that Any Human Life is Dispensable, (The Environmental Forum, p. 50 (March/April 2017)).
• Frederick Mark Gedicks, Rule of Law and Socially Constructed Reasons: Marriage Equality and Religious Accommodation, (5 Journal of Law, Religion & State, Forthcoming).
• Ashutosh Avinash Bhagwat, When Speech is Not 'Speech', (Ohio State Law Journal, Forthcoming).
• S.I. Strong, Transforming Religious Liberties: A New Theory of Religious Rights for National and International Legal Systems - Chapter One: Introduction, (Cambridge University Press, anticipated 2017).
• Caroline Mala Corbin, Justice Scalia, the Establishment Clause, and Christian Privilege, (First Amendment Law Review, Vol. 15, 2017).
• Joel Waldfogel & Pau M. Vaaler, Discriminatory Product Differentiation: The Case of Israel's Omission from Airline Route Maps, (February 16, 2017).
• David M. Schizer, Subsidies and Nonprofit Governance: Comparing the Charitable Deduction with the Exemption for Endowment Income, (Columbia Law and Economics Working Paper No. 558 (2017)).

From SSRN (European Issues):

• Mark Walters, Rupert Brown & Susann Wiedlitzka, Causes and Motivations of Hate Crime, (Equality and Human Rights Commission Research Report 102 (2016)).
• Mark Walters & Rupert Brown, Preventing Hate Crime, (October 9, 2016).
• Catherine Moore, Ariel Ricker, J. Michal Forbes & Alexander Ayer, Discrimination Based Upon Race, Religion, and Ethnicity When Filing for Asylum in the European Union (Policy Paper), (Advocates Abroad, 2017).

House Hearing On State of Religious Liberty In U.S.

Last Thursday, the House Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice held a hearing on "The State of Religious Liberty in America." A video of the full hearing and transcripts of the prepared testimony of the four witnesses who testified are available on the Committee's website.  Testifying were representatives of the Christian Legal Society, Becket and Alliance Defending Freedom as well as Rabbi David Saperstein who until recently served as the U.S. Ambassador at-Large for International Religious Freedom. For a critical view of the hearing, see this report from Religion Dispatches.

European Court of Justice Advocate's Opinion on Tax Exemption For Catholic Church

In Congregación de Escuelas Pías Provincia Betania v. Ayuntamiento de Getafe, (CJEU, Feb. 16, 2017), an Advocate General's opinion recommended that the Court of Justice of the European Union hold that a construction tax exemption for a school building to which the Catholic Church is entitled under a 1979 agreement between Spain and the Holy See does not violate the the ban on anti-competitive state aid set out in Art. 107(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The opinion allows the exemption only where any commercial educational services are merely ancillary to non-profit offerings. The exemption is allowed if at least 90% of its services are educational offerings in the context of the Church's social, cultural and educational mission.  Law & Religion UK has more on the decision.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Scott v. Uhler, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18624 (ND NY, Feb. 8, 2017), a New York federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing the complaint of a number of Muslim inmates that their 1st and 14th Amendment rights were violated when they were not allowed to attend Jumm'ah services on Dec. 25, 2015.

In Taylor v. Kelley, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18430 (ED AR, Feb. 9, 2017), an Arkansas federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19094, Jan. 25, 2017) and dismissed a complaint by two Muslim inmates that on the last day of Ramadan their fast-breaking snack was delivered one hour late.

In Ilarraza v. Chuta, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20057 (MD PA, Feb. 10, 2017), a Pennsylvania federal magistrate judge recommended that a now-released inmate be allowed to move ahead with his complaint that he was denied a Spanish-English interpreter so he could learn more about his Native American religion and attend religious services.

In France v. Brown, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20183 (SD CA, Feb. 13, 2017), a California federal district court dismissed an inmate's complaint that his parole conditions that included entry into a residential treatment center subjected him to religious indoctrination and were inconsistent with his religion of "Here-and-Nowism."

In Scott v. South Carolina Department of Corrections, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19835 (D SC, Feb. 13, 2017), a South Carolina federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20572, Jan. 26, 2017) and dismissed an inmate's complaint about the Department of Corrections' refusal in the past to recognize Shetaut Neter as a religion.  The religion is currently recognized.

In Oliver v. Adams, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21518 (D CA, Feb. 14, 2017), a California federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing an inmate's complaint of refusals to accommodate his practice of his Shetaut Neter faith, including a Kemetic diet.

In Rountree v. Clarke, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21776 (WD VA, Feb. 16, 2017), a Virginia federal district court dismissed a female inmate's complaint that she was not permitted to possess and use a yoga mat in her cell to practice yoga according to her Buddhist beliefs.

In Walters v. Livingston, 2017 Tex. App. LEXIS 1323 (TX App, Feb. 15, 2017), a Texas state appeals court allowed a former inmate to move ahead with his claim for damages and declaratory relief on his complaint that he was denied the right to personally smoke a "sacred ceremonial pipe" during religious ceremonies.

In Israel, Retailer Takes Criticism For Catalog Aimed At Ultra-Orthodox Jews

As U.S. law struggles to balance free exercise rights with legal non-discrimination mandates, this story from Israel yesterday demonstrates that new permutations may well arise.  The Forward and Jewish News Online report that the Swedish furniture retailer Ikea is receiving criticism for the catalog its Israeli affiliate distributed hoping to attract Haredi (ultra-Orthodox Jewish) customers.  The catalog contains no photos of women.  Only men and boys in clothing usually worn by religious Jews are shown using Ikea furniture. It is not unusual for Haredi newspapers to exclude photos of women.

SCOTUS Sets Oral Arguments In Trinity Lutheran Case For April 19

The U.S. Supreme Court has set oral argument in Trinity Lutheran Church v. Pauley for April 19. (Argument calendar.) In the case, the 8th Circuit rejected arguments that Missouri's Blaine Amendments violate the U.S. Constitution's 1st and 14th Amendments. At issue was the denial by Missouri's Department of Natural Resources of a grant application by Trinity Church for a Playground Scrap Tire Surface Material Grant that would have allowed it to resurface a playground at its day care and preschool facility on church premises. (See prior posting.)  The Court granted certiorari in the case over a year ago.  The delay in setting the case for oral argument has led to speculation that the Justices were hoping to hold off hearing the case until a replacement for the late Justice Scalia brought the Court up to its full complement. They may have succeeded since, as reported by The Hill, the Senate Judiciary Committee has now set March 20 as the date for hearings on Judge Neil Gorsuch's nomination to begin. SCOTUSblog's case page has links to all the briefs filed in the case and to commentary on the case.

Jewish Groups Criticize Trump's Response To Questions About Anti-Semitism

JTA reports that the American Jewish Committee and the Anti-Defamation League have issued statements criticizing President Donald Trump's response at his news conference yesterday to a question from reporter Jake Turx of Ami Magazine regarding anti-Semitism.  Here is a transcript of much of the exchange taken from the White House's full transcript of the news conference:

Q    ... [W]hat we are concerned about, and what we haven’t really heard be addressed is an uptick in anti-Semitism and how the government is planning to take care of it.  There have been reports out that 48 bomb threats have been made against Jewish centers all across the country in the last couple of weeks.  There are people who are committing anti-Semitic acts or threatening to --

THE PRESIDENT:  You see, he said he was going to ask a very simple, easy question.  And it’s not.  It’s not.  Not a simple question, not a fair question.  Okay, sit down.  I understand the rest of your question.

So here’s the story, folks.  Number one, I am the least anti-Semitic person that you’ve ever seen in your entire life.  Number two, racism -- the least racist person.  In fact, we did very well relative to other people running as a Republican....

... See, he lied about -- he was going to get up and ask a very straight, simple question.  So you know, welcome to the world of the media.  But let me just tell you something -- that I hate the charge.  I find it repulsive.  I hate even the question because people that know me -- and you heard the Prime Minister, you heard Netanyahu yesterday -- did you hear him, Bibi?  He said, I’ve known Donald Trump for a long time, and then he said, forget it.

So you should take that, instead of having to get up and ask a very insulting question like that.

The AJC's statement also criticized Trump's non-responsiveness to a similar question at his news conference (full transcript) on Wednesday with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu.

Jewish School's Challenge To Zoning Decision Is Ripe For Litigation

In Congregation Kollel, Inc. v. Township of Howell, N.J., (D NJ, Feb. 16, 2017), a New Jersey federal district court rejected a township's lack of ripeness defense in a suit by an Orthodox Jewish organization that is attempting to construct a classroom building, dormitory and faculty housing for a Talmudic academy.  The township rejected the academy's permit application and instead insisted that it apply for a zoning variance. Plaintiffs, believing that the land use decision was based on religious animus towards the Orthodox Jewish faith, sued claiming violations of RLUIPA, the Fair Housing Act, the 1st and 14th Amendments and state law.  The township argued that the suit should not be decided until plaintiffs had applied for a zoning variance.  The court held, however, that a variance application would not result in development of any additional factual record and that (except for one state law claim) plaintiffs can move ahead with their suit.

Washington Supreme Court Says Florist's Refusal To Sell For Same-Sex Wedding Violated State Law

In a widely followed case, the state of Washington's Supreme Court yesterday unanimously upheld a trial court's decision that a florist's religiously-motivated refusal to sell arranged flowers for a same-sex wedding violates the Washington Law Against Discrimination.  In State of Washington v. Arlene's Flowers, Inc.,WA Sup. Ct., Feb. 16, 2017), the court, summarizing its 59-page decision, said:

Discrimination based on same-sex marriage constitutes discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. We therefore hold that the conduct for which Stutzman [the florist shop owner] was cited and fined in this case-refusing her commercially marketed wedding floral services to Ingersoll and Freed because theirs would be a same-sex wedding-constitutes sexual orientation discrimination under the WLAD. We also hold that the WLAD may be enforced against Stutzman because it does not infringe any constitutional protection. As applied in this case, the WLAD does not compel speech or association. And assuming that it substantially burdens Stutzman's religious free exercise, the WLAD does not violate her right to religious free exercise under either the First Amendment or article I, section 11 [of the state constitution] because it is a neutral, generally applicable law that serves our state government's compelling interest in eradicating discrimination in public accommodations.

A press release from ADF says that florist Barronelle Stutzman will seek U.S. Supreme Court review in the case. Links to pleadings and court rulings in the case can also be found on ADF's case page. (See prior related posting.) Tri-City Herald reports on the decision.

Trump Keeps Special Envoy For LGBTI Rights At State Department

Foreign Policy this week reports that  the Trump Administration has decided to keep Obama-appointee Randy Berry in his State Department position of Special Envoy for the Human Rights of LGBTI Persons. According to Foreign Policy:

The special envoy position was created during the Obama years to fight back against the discrimination of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people around the globe. Conservative groups have called the office an attempt to “entrench the LGBTI agenda” into the United States government, and accuse it of browbeating countries opposed to gay-friendly school textbooks and same-sex marriage.

Berry repeatedly stressed that his goal was to convince foreign governments to stop violence against gays and lesbians rather than pressure every nation to allow same-sex marriage. 

Berry, who is an openly gay career Foreign Service officer, will also stay on as deputy assistant secretary to the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, a position to which he was appointed in the last hours of the Obama administration. Christian evangelical groups had called for Trump to dismiss Berry.

2016 Census of Hate Groups Released

The Southern Poverty Law Center yesterday released its annual census of hate groups and other extremist organizations. The census, which lists 917 groups for 2016, is in the form of an interactive map showing the location of each group. The 2015 census showed 892 hate groups.  Anti-Muslim hate groups rose to 101, up from 34 a year earlier.

6th Circuit: County Board's Prayer Practice Violates Establishment Clause

In Bormuth v. County of Jackson, (6th Cir., Feb. 15, 2017), the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in a 2-1 decision held that the manner in which the Jackson County, Michigan Board of Commissioners opens its meetings with prayer violates the Establishment Clause.  The majority held that the County Commissioners went beyond that permitted by the Supreme Court's Town of Greece decision.  Plaintiff in the case was Peter Bormuth who described himself as a Pagan and an Animist. When during the public comment period at one meeting Bormuth complained that the invocation practice violated the Establishment Clause, one of the Commissioners "made faces expressing his disgust" and then turned his chair around so he would not look at Bormuth while he spoke.

Judge Moore's majority opinion said in part:

A combination of factors distinguishes this case from the practice upheld in Marsh and Town of Greece, including one important factor: the identity of the prayer giver.... Here, the Jackson County Commissioners give the prayers.... The difference is not superficial. When the Board of Commissioners opens its monthly meetings with prayers, there is no distinction between the government and the prayer giver: they are one and the same....

Because they are the ones delivering the prayers, the Commissioners—and only the Commissioners—are responsible for the prayers’ content.... And because that content is exclusively Christian, by delivering the prayers, the Commissionersare effectively endorsing a specific religion....

What is more, the prayer givers are exclusively Christian because of an intentional decision by the Board of Commissioners.... [A]t least one Jackson County Commissioner admitted that, in order to control the prayers’ content, he did not want to invite the public to give prayers....

First, the Board of Commissioners directs the public to participate in the prayers at every monthly meeting.... Second, the Board of Commissioners has singled out Bormuth for opprobrium. During a public meeting, a Commissioner stated that Bormuth’s lawsuit was an "attack on Christianity and Jesus Christ, period."...

Third, Bormuth has submitted evidence suggesting that the Board of Commissioners has “allocated benefits and burdens based on participation in the prayer.” ... Shortly after Bormuth filed his complaint, Jackson County officials nominated members for the County’s new Solid Waste Planning Committee from a pool of applicants.... Although Bormuth had three years of experience working on related issues, the Board of Commissioners did not nominate him.

Judge Griffin filed a lengthy dissenting opinion. AP reports on the decision.

Trump's EEOC Continues To Fight Transgender Employment Discrimination

Slate reported yesterday that it has become clear that the EEOC under the Trump Administration will continue to fight employment discrimination against transgender individuals.  In a brief (full text) filed with the 6th Circuit on Feb. 10, the EEOC argued that Title VII's prohibition on "sex" discrimination includes discrimination based on transgender status and/or transitioning.  It also argued that religious beliefs are not a basis for discriminating against transgender individuals. The brief comes in an appeal in EEOC v. R.G, a suit in which a Michigan federal district court upheld a funeral home's defense under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to a charge that it engaged in gender stereotyping when it dismissed a transgender employee who was in the process of transitioning from male to female. (See prior posting.)

UPDATE: I should add that it has become clear that the EEOC will continue to take this position for now.  Because there is a vacancy on the Commission, a Democratic commissioner's position comes up for appointment later this year and the General Counsel position is vacant, the Commission could change its position in the future. The Slate article points out these possibilities.

New Suit Challenges Syrian Refugee Ban In Trump Executive Order; Hawaii Suit Moves Ahead

The portion of President Trump's travel ban Executive Order which suspends entry of refugees from Syria into the United States was challenged in a lawsuit filed on Monday in a Wisconsin federal district court by a Sunni Muslim who was granted asylum status because of torture and religious persecution he had
suffered in Syria.  The complaint (full text) in Doe v. Trump, (WD WI, filed 2/13/2017), says that the ban prevents plaintiff from bringing his wife and 3-year old daughter to the U.S. from Syria under a derivative asylum petition which is being processed by the government. The Executive Order prevents USCIS from adjudicating the petition and the State Department from issuing visas to his family.  It also contends that the nationwide temporary restraining order issued by a Washington federal district court is not broad enough to cover this situation because the TRO applies only to enforcement at "United States borders and ports of entry." This new suit alleges that the Executive Order violates the Establishment Clause, the Equal Protection and Due Process clauses and various statutory provisions. WRN News reports on the lawsuit.

Meanwhile, Hawaii's Attorney General announced yesterday that a federal district judge has partially lifted a stay he imposed last week on Hawaii's suit against the Executive Order. This allows an Hawaii resident to be added as a plaintiff.  The court also allowed Hawaii to file an amended complaint (full text) adding a challenge under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. KHON News reports on these developments.

Pakistani Court Bans Public Valentine's Day Celebrations

AP reports that a court in Pakistan's capital of Islamabad has banned all Valentine's Day celebrations in public places or at official levels in the capital city. The court, whose ruling applies only in the capital city, said that the celebrations violate Islamic law.  Pakistan's media regulator instructed all media outlets not to print or broadcast any Valentine's Day promotions.

Virginia Federal Judge Says Trump Travel Ban Likely Violates Establishment Clause

Yesterday another court ruled against President Trump's Executive Order that temporarily bars entry into the country of individuals from seven majority-Muslim nations.  In Aziz v. Trump, (ED VA, Feb. 13, 2017), a Virginia federal district court concluded that Virginia had produced unrebutted evidence that it is likely to succeed on its Establishment Clause claim, saying in part:

The "Muslim ban" was the centerpiece of the president's campaign for months.... [Rudy] Giuliani said two days after the EO was signed that Trump's desire for a Muslim ban was the impetus for this policy.

The court enjoined enforcement of Section 3(c) of the Executive Order at any port of entry against Virginia residents how either were lawful permanent residents or who held a valid student visa or work visa at the time the Executive Order was signed. NBC4 News reports on the decision.

Settlement Reached In Suit Against Jehovah's Witness Congregation Over Sex Abuse

Penn Live reports that a settlement has been reached on the fifth day of a trial in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania in a suit against a Jehovah's Witness congregation and other Jehovah's Witness organizations. In the suit, plaintiff claims that as a teenager she was sexually abused by a member of her church and church elders covered up the situation and failed to report it to authorities after the girl's mother contacted church elders.  The full text of the complaint in the case, Fessler v. Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc., (PA Com. Pleas, filed 3/26/2014), is discussed in another report by Penn Live.

Court Denies Preliminary Injunction In Tribal Challenge To Dakota Pipeline

AP reports that a federal district judge in Washington, D.C. yesterday refused to grant a temporary injunction against construction of the portion of the Dakota Access Pipeline running under Lake Oahe.  The Cheyenne River and Standing Rock Sioux tribes had sued claiming that the pipeline violates their rights under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. (See prior posting.) The judge ruled on the motion after an hour-long hearing, concluding that the Tribe's religious exercise would not be infringed before oil actually begins running through the pipeline. Full arguments on the motion will be heard by the court on Feb. 27.

Trump Justice Department Withdraws Objections To Nationwide Injunction In Transgender Bathroom Case

As previously reported, last year a Texas federal district court issued a nationwide preliminary injunction barring the federal government from enforcing Guidelines interpreting Title IX as barring discrimination by schools on the basis of gender identity.  In particular the Guidelines took the position that transgender students must have access to restrooms and locker rooms consistent with their gender identity. Subsequently the Obama administration asked the court for a partial stay that would limit the injunction, pending appeal, to the 13 states that were plaintiffs in the case.  As reported by AP, a hearing on that motion was to have been held Feb. 14.  However on Friday, the Justice Department withdrew the government's request for a partial stay, and indicated it was "currently considering how best to proceed in this appeal." (Full text of court filing.)

Last week, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals approved a similar nationwide injunction against President Trump's Executive Order barring travel from seven Muslim countries. (See prior posting.) In its unsuccessful motion for a stay (full text, see pg. 24), the Justice Department argued that a nationwide injunction was improper because it went beyond providing relief to the plaintiffs in the case.

Russians Divided Over Return of Famous Cathedral To The Church

AP reports that in St. Petersburg, Russia, competing demonstrations were staged yesterday over the city's decision, announced last month, to return St. Isaac's Cathedral to the Russian Orthodox Church. The Cathedral was seized after Soviets took control in 1917, and was turned into a museum.  It has become one of the city's top tourist attractions. Opponents of the return are concerned that Church tours will begin to focus too much on the Cathedral's religious aspects at the expense of its architectural and cultural importance.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Andrew Koppelman, If Liberals Knew Themselves Better, Conservatives Might Like Them Better, (20 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 1201 (2017))
• Graham Polando, Restraining Free Exercise: Protection Orders and Church Attendance, (February 5, 2017).
• B. Jessie Hill, Kingdom Without End? The Inevitable Expansion of Religious Sovereignty Claims, (Lewis & Clark Law Review, Vol. 20, 2017).
• Robin Fretwell Wilson, Unpacking the Relationship between Conscience and Access, (Forthcoming, Law, Religion, and Health in the United States, Holly Fernandez Lynch, I. Glenn Cohen, Elizabeth Sepper, eds. Cambridge U. Press 2017).
• Sahar F. Aziz, Losing the 'War of Ideas': A Critique of Countering Violent Extremism Programs, (Texas International Law Journal, Forthcoming).
• Christian Turner, Submarine Statutes, (February 8, 2017).
• Mary Anne Case, Forms of Patriarchy in Amoris Laetitia and in the Papacy of Francis, (U of Chicago, Public Law Working Paper No. 613 (2017)).
• Claudia E. Haupt, Antidiscrimination in the Legal Profession and the First Amendment: A Partial Defense of Model Rule 8.4(g), (19 University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law Online (2017 Forthcoming)).
• Gertrude N. Levine & Samuel J. Levine, Internet Ethics, American Law, and Jewish Law: A Comparative Overview (21 J. Tech. L. & Pol’y 37 (2016)).

From SSRN (Focus on individuals):

• Andrew Koppelman, Kent Greenawalt, Defender of the Faith, (Texas Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Michael John DeBoer, Justice Brent E. Dickson, State Constitutional Interpretation, and the Religion Provisions of the Indiana Constitution, (Indiana Law Review, Vol. 50, No. 1, 2016).

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

• Shital Prakash Kharat, Effect of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act 2005 – Judicial Response, (February 6, 2017).
• Grant Robert Hooper, From the Magna Carta to Bentham to Modern Australian Judicial Review: Themes of Practicality and Spirituality, (Australian Institute of Administrative Law (AIAL) Forum, Vol. 84, pp. 22-44, 2016).

From SSRN (LGBT Rights):

• Reva Siegel, Same-Sex Marriage and Backlash: Consensus, Conflict, and Constitutional Culture, (February 9, 2017).
• Susan Frelich Appleton, Obergefell's Liberties: All in the Family, (Ohio State Law Journal, Vol. 77, No. 5, 2016).
• Malcolm Langford, Revisiting Joslin v. New Zealand: Same-Sex Marriage in Polarised Times, (E. Brems and E. Desmet, Integrated Human Rights in Practice: Rewriting Human Rights Decisions (Edward Elgar, 2017)).
• Katherine Pratt, The Tax Definition of 'Medical Care': A Critique of the Startling IRS Arguments in O'Donnabhain v. Commissioner, (23 Michigan Journal of Gender & Law 313 (2016)).
• Robin Fretwell Wilson, Squaring Faith and Sexuality: Religious Institutions and the Unique Challenge of Sports, (Law and Inequality: A Journal of Theory and Practice, Vol. 34, No. 385, 2016).
• Robin Fretwell Wilson, The Nonsense About Bathrooms: How Purported Concerns over Safety Block LGBT Nondiscrimination Laws and Obscure Real Religious Liberty Concerns, (Lewis & Clark Law Review, Vol. 20, No. 4, 2017).

From SmartCILP and elsewhere:

• Michael J. Churgin, Is Religion Different? Is There a Thumb on the Scale in Refugee Convention Appellate Court Adjudication in the United States? Some Preliminary Thoughts, [Abstract], 51 Texas International Law Journal 213-228 (2016).
• David L. Hudson, Jr. & Emily H. Harvey, Dissecting The Hybrid Rights Exception: Should It Be Expanded or Rejected?, [Abstract], 38 University of Arkansas Little Rock Law Review 449-475 (2016).
• Hon. Gail T. Kulick, Tadd M. Johnson, Rebecca St. George, & Emily Segar-Johnson, From Dysfunction and Polarization to Legislation: Native American Religious Freedom Rights and Minnesota Autopsy Law, 42 Mitchell Hamline Law Reveiw 1699-1721 (2016).
• Law, Religion and the Family Unit After Hobby Lobby: A Tribute to Professor Harry Krause, 2016 University of Illinois Law Review 1227-1808.
• Symposium: Law and Religion In an Increasingly Polarized America,(Lewis & Clark Law Review, Vo. 20, No. 4, 2017).
• Symposium on Religious Liberty and Christian Higher Education, (Two Kingdoms Network, Concordia University, 2017). The Symposium, among others, includes Howard M. Friedman, The Future of Religious Liberty.

USCIRF Issues New Report On Vietnam

Last week the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom released a report titled Religious Freedom in Vietnam: Assessing the Country of Particular Concern Designation 10 Years After its Removal. The Introduction summarizes the report's theme:

Of all the countries the U.S. government has designated as CPCs, Vietnam is unique in that it is the only one removed from the CPC list due to diplomatic activity. This raises several questions: Why was Vietnam first designated as a CPC? What was different about this designation that led to Vietnam’s swift removal from the list? If the strategy was a success in de-listing Vietnam, why has it not been replicated in other countries? This paper examines the history and efficacy of Vietnam’s CPC designation, ultimately arguing it should be re-designated.

Florida Judge Says Refusal To Sell Cake With Anti-Gay Message Is Not Religious Discrimination

A Florida Administrative Law Judge in a decision last week recommended to the Florida Commission on Human Relations that it find a Longwood, Florida bakery did not violate the state's public accommodation law when it effectively refused an order for a cake with the inscription "Homosexuality is an abomination unto the Lord." Cut the Cake bakery, owned by a mother and daughter, quoted a caller a price of $5,850 for the cake after the bakery had been the subject of thousands of calls per week when a You-Tube video was posted of a previous call in which the bakery refused to make a cake displaying an anti-homosexual message. In Mannarino v. Cut the Cake Bakery, (FL Div. Admin. Hearings, Feb. 9, 2017), petitioner claimed that the refusal constituted religious discrimination against him as a Christian.  The judge ruled, however, that the bakery did not fall within the definition of "public accommodation" under Florida law since it does not sell food for consumption on the premises. Additionally he ruled that petitioner had not shown religious discrimination, saying:

Cut the Cake refused to fulfill Petitioner’s order, not because he was Christian, but because of what it perceived to be the purpose of his message. Cut the Cake considered Petitioner’s message mean-spirited, regardless of his religion or the Quote’s source.

St. Augustine Record reports on the decision.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Fluker v. King, (5th Cir., Feb. 9, 2017), the 5th Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a suit by a Muslim inmate who complained that Muslim c-custody inmates could not attend Jumu’ah services outside of their unit while non-Muslim c-custody inmates could.

In Conway v. Alford, (8th Cir., Feb. 8, 2017), the 8th Circuit concluded that the mailroom's withholding of publications from the Church of Jesus Christ Christian, classified as a security threat/ terrorist group, did not substantially burden an inmate's religious exercise.

In Vasquez v. Rockland County, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14746 (SD NY, Jan. 31, 2017), a New York federal district court dismissed a complaint by an inmate that he was prevented from observing Ramadan due to being placed on a suicide watch.

In Gilliam v. Baez, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15680 (SD NY, Feb. 2, 2017), a New York federal district court dismissed without prejudice an inmate's complaint that on two occasions he was permitted to participate in Nation of Islam classes.

In Harris v. Norwood, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15979 (WD AR, Feb. 6, 2017), an Arkansas federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16205, Jan. 12, 2017) and permitted an inmate to proceed with his complaint that his free exercise rights were infringed when he, as a "pork free person", was denied pork free meal trays.

In Ayoubi v. Dart, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16310 (ND IL, Jan. 31, 2017), an Illinois federal district court dismissed a complaint by a Muslim inmate who the court described as "an experienced pro se litigator." Plaintiff objected to limits on his access to religious services, refusal of post-Ramadan-fast meal trays, denial of a Halal diet containing meat, and prohibition on his using a prayer rug and wearing a head garment.

In Young v. Hooks, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17115 (SD OH, Feb. 7, 2017), an Ohio federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing an inmate's complaint that during a search of his cell his bottle of prayer oil was poured out.

In Edwards v. Thomas, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17111 (MD PA, Feb. 6, 2017), a Pennsylvania federal district court allowed a Muslim inmate to move ahead with his free exercise challenge to the refusal of his request for a kosher diet, which would have met his Halal diet requirements.

In Branco v. Milligan, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18094 (ND OH, Feb. 7, 2017), an Ohio federal district court dismissed a complaint by an inmate that on one occasion officials overlooked his housing unit when calling Muslim inmates down for a meal during Ramadan.

In Wallace v. Olivarria, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18148 (SD CA, Feb. 8, 2017), a California federal district court dismissed an inmate's claim that a change in the schedule for his prison job violated his right to practice his religion.

In Martinez v. Richardson, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18188 (ED TX, Feb. 8, 2017), a Texas federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18515, Jan. 19, 2017) and dismissed a complaint by a Satanist inmate that he was not permitted to perform Satanic rituals or possess various items (e.g. parchment paper, candles, a robe, a bell, a wand, a chalice) needed to practice his religion.