DC Archdiocese Sues Over Rejection of Christmas Season Bus Ads

The Washington, D.C. Catholic Archdiocese yesterday filed suit in federal district court against the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority after WMATA rejected ads designed to be placed on the exterior of buses promoting the Archdiocese's "Find the Perfect Gift" Campaign.  The complaint (full text) in Archdiocese of Washington v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, (D DC, filed 11/28/2017), describes the ads:

the advertisements depict, in minimalist style, a starry night, with silhouettes of a small group of shepherds and sheep standing on a hill. All of the advertisements refer to an Internet site, FindThePerfectGift.org, which contains links to Mass schedules, opportunities for charitable service, information about religious holiday traditions, and reflections on the meaning of the Advent and Christmas seasons. The advertisements also refer to a social-media hashtag, #PerfectGift.

The WMATA advertising Guidelines prohibit ads that "promote or oppose any religion, religious practice, or belief."  The complaint alleges that the Guidelines as applied to this ad violate the Archdiocese's 1st amendment free speech and free exercise rights, RFRA, as well as denying it equal protection and due process.  The Archdiocese issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

Magazine Profiles Christian Advocacy Organization

The Nation today published a long article titled The Christian Legal Army Behind ‘Masterpiece Cakeshop’: A special investigation into the rise of Alliance Defending Freedom.  Here is a short excerpt:

The overarching story highlighted in this substantial body of ADF’s briefs—most of which are available in public databases—is the organization’s painstaking construction, case by case and argument by argument, of a legal narrative asserting that Christians are under threat of persecution from the advance of LGBTQ and reproductive rights, as well as from secular schools and universities, and that the law must allow Christians to disregard, disobey, or even dismantle laws protecting those rights in order to protect their own rights to free speech and the free exercise of religion.

Indonesian Christians Get Temporary Stay of Deportation

In Devitri v. Cronen, (D MA, Nov. 27, 2017), a Massachusetts federal district court issued a temporary injunction barring the federal government from removing 51 Indonesian Christians who fear religious persecution if their final Orders of Removal are implemented. As explained by the court:

In 2010, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) instituted a humanitarian program called Operation Indonesian Surrender, through which Petitioners were granted Orders of Supervision, allowing them to seek employment and subjecting them to certain mandatory conditions. Petitioners also received temporary stays of removal that were renewed over multiple years. In the summer of 2017, these individuals were informed that they would be removed from the United States.

Petitioners claim that they need additional time to exercise their statutory right to move to reopen their cases based on changed country conditions that arose after their Orders of Removal became final. The court asked the government for additional briefing on how long the temporary injunction should remain in effect to give a reasonable time to file a motion to reopen.  ACLU issued a press release announcing the court's decision.

China Bans Tours To The Vatican

According to a report yesterday by UCA News, in China the State Tourism Bureau has sent a directive to travel agencies instructing them to end tours to the Vatican.  Travel agencies were instructed to remove the Vatican and St. Peter's Basilica from their list of tour destinations.  Any travel agency advertising those destinations will be subject to a fine equivalent to $45,430(US).  The directive apparently stems from the long simmering tensions between Beijing and the Holy See.

Abortion Clinic Buffer Zone Upheld

In Bruni v. City of Pittsburgh, (WD PA, Nov. 17, 2017), a Pennsylvania federal district court, in a case on remand from the 3rd Circuit (see prior posting), granted summary judgment to defendants in a case challenging Pittsburgh's ordinance that imposes a 15-foot buffer zone around abortion clinics and other health care facilities.  According to the court, "the undisputed evidence in this case demonstrates that the Ordinance places only a minimal burden on Plaintiffs’ First Amendment free speech rights."  The court went on:

Plaintiffs argue that the City should have considered any number of other alternatives prior to adopting the Ordinance, including targeted injunctions and/or the enforcement of antiharassment statutes.... [I]n light of the Court’s finding that the current law burdens very little speech to begin with, there is no reason to believe that any of these alternative measures would burden substantially less speech than does the current Ordinance.

BNA Daily Report for Executives [subscription required] reports on the decision.

White House Unveils This Year's Christmas Decorations

In a press release today, the White House announced that this year's White House Christmas decorations are themed "Time Honored Traditions." The press release and an ABC News report describe the decorations, selected by First Lady Melania Trump, in more detail. This year's family Christmas card, signed by the President, the First Lady and their son Barron, reads "Merry Christmas and Happy New Year."

Supreme Court Denies Review In School Board Prayer and Funeral Picketing Cases

Today the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in American Humanist Association v. Birdville Independent School District, (Docket No. 17-178, cert. denied 11/27/2017). (Order List).  In the case, the 5th Circuit upheld a school board's practice of opening its meetings with presentations from students, which often involve a prayer.  It held that legislative prayer cases, not the decisions regarding school prayer, govern this situation. (See prior posting.)

The Supreme Court today also denied review in Phelps-Roper v. Ricketts, (Docket No. 17-427, cert. denied 11/27/2017). (Order List).  In the case the 8th Circuit upheld Nebraska's Funeral Picketing Law against both facial and as-applied challenges brought by members of the Westboro Baptist Church. (See prior posting.)

Massachusetts Court Will Hear Conservative Synagogue Suit Alleging Chabad Takeover

JTA reports on a lawsuit brought by members of a Sharon, Massachusetts Conservative Jewish synagogue that will be heard today in a  Massachusetts trial court.  Members of Temple Adath Sharon, in a lawsuit filed in November 2015, allege that Chabad of Sharon, which was experiencing financial difficulties, worked to have its members elected to the Conservative synagogue's board and as its officers in order to obtain a transfer of the synagogue's building and assets to Chabad.  It also claims that the April 2015 meeting that elected the board and officers was not properly announced and conducted. Chabad denies the allegations.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Philip J. Candreva, Playground or Church? Implications for Public Administration from Trinity Lutheran v. Comer, (Public Administration Review, Forthcoming).
• Julie Ringelheim, State Religious Neutrality as a Common European Standards? Reappraising the European Court of Human Rights Approach, (Oxford Journal of Law and Religion, Vol. 6, no.1, p. 1-24 (2017)).
• Scott W. Gaylord, Is a Cake Worth a Thousand Words? Masterpiece Cakeshop and the Impact of Antidiscrimination Laws on the Marketplace of Ideas, (Tennessee Law Review, Vol. 85, Forthcoming).
• Mark Strasser, Obergefell's Legacy, (24 Duke Journal of Gender Law & Policy 61-88 (2016)).

From SmartCILP:

• Heidi Liu & Caleb C. Wolanek, Applying Strict Scrutiny: An Empirical Analysis of Free Exercise Cases, 78 Montana Law Review 275-312 (2017).
• Symposium, The Teachings of Pope Francis: Toward a Vision of Social Justice and Sustainable Capitalism? (Introduction by Steven W. Bender; articles by Michael Kaufman, Steven A. Ramirez, Nicholas Capaldi, Gilbert Paul Carrasco, Iryna Zaverukha, Russell Powell, Dean Vincent Rougeau, Amelia J. Uelmen). 40 Seattle University Law Review 1167-1415 (2017).
• Rev. John C. Lentz Jr., The Bystander in the Bible, 2017 Utah L. Rev. 661-705.
• Marcia L. McCormick, Religious Privilege to Discriminate as Religious Freedom: From Charitable Choice to Faith Based Initiatives to RFRA and FADA, 56 Washburn Law Journal 229-243 (2017).
• John R. Dorocak, How Might a Church's Tax-Exempt Status (and Other Advantages) Be Revoked Procedurally for Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage or Be Defended Possibly as Free Exercise of Religion?, [Abstract], 53 Willamette Law Review 161-184 (2017).
• Sarah M. Stephens, Freedom From Religion: A Vulnerability Theory Approach to Restricting Conscience Exemptions in Reproductive Healthcare, 29 Yale Journal of Law & Feminism 93-121 (2017).

Pakistan Troops Clash With Islamic Protesters Who Accuse Law Minister of Blasphemy

According to a report yesterday from BBC News, the government of Pakistan has deployed troops to the city of Islamabad to deal with protesters who have been blocking a key highway interchange for several weeks.  Protesters from the Islamist Tehreek-i-Labaik Ya Rasool Allah Party  are demanding the firing of Law Minister Zahid Hamid, claiming that he is guilty of blasphemy because of a provision in his 2017 Election Reform Bill passed by the National Assembly.

Here is the issue, as explained by Daily Pakistan. Under prior law, the nomination form that a candidate for office was required to complete included the following for all Muslim candidates:

I, the above mentioned candidate, solemnly swear that--

(i) I believe in the absolute and unqualified finality of the Prophethood of Muhammad (Peace be upon him), the last of the prophets and that I am not the follower of anyone who claims to be a Prophet in any sense of the word or of any description whatsoever after Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him), and that I do not recognize such a claimant to be Prophet or a religious reformer, nor do I belong to the Qadiani group or the Lahori group or call myself an Ahmadi.

In the 2017 legislation, this statement became an unsworn declaration by the candidate. Hamid said that this was a clerical error, and earlier this month Pakistan's National Assembly amended the 2017 Bill to restore this anti-Ahmadi provision as a sworn statement in the candidate nomination form. (TheNation).  That apparently did not assuage protesters' objections.  AP reports that at least 6 people were killed and 200 wounded in clashes yesterday between police and protesters in Islamabad.  Other opposition members of Parliament have different kinds of objections to other parts of the 2017 Bill.

UPDATE: Reuters (11/28) reports on the negotiated settlement of the conflict, though the military's role in the negotiations has raised questions.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Brooks v. Walsh, (9th Cir., Nov. 22, 2017), the 9th Circuit upheld a qualified immunity defense in an inmate's suit because "it would not have been clear to every reasonable official that it was unlawful to require Brooks to fill out a Faith Group Affiliation Declaration form in order to reinstate his participation in the Common Fare diet after Brooks' voluntary withdrawal."

In King v. Stach, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 190788 (WD WA, Nov. 17, 2017), a Washington federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 191891, Oct. 19, 2017) and dismissed a Muslim inmate's complaint that unsanitary conditions in his safety/ observation cell made it impossible for him to perform his prayers, and that a corrections officer told him that he would be better off praying to Jesus.

In Veach v. Henderson County Detention Center, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 193177 (WD KY, Nov. 22, 2017), a Kentucky federal district court dismissed an inmate's complaint that on one occasion he was not given his Jewish meal tray.

In Rivera v. Davey, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 193607 (ED CA, Nov. 22, 2017), a California federal magistrate judge ordered dismissal unless an amended complaint is filed of an inmate's complaint that he was denied equal access to the facility's chapel for Jewish prayer services and holy day events.

Catholic Bishops Oppose Parts of Senate's Tax Reform Draft

Earlier this week, the chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development issued a letter (full text) (press release)  criticizing the current version of the Senate's Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.  The letter calls for the Senate to amend its draft "to better ensure a just and moral framework for all."  While supporting some aspects of the bill, the Bishops expressed concern over a number of the provisions, analyzing them in light of six moral principles the Bishops had set fort in a statement on tax reform last October. Many of the criticisms focus on "care for the poor and concern for families."  Among the specific concerns expressed were opposition to repeal of the Affordable Care Act mandate without more comprehensive health care reform; concern that families with more than three children will find themselves in a worse tax situation that at present; concern that stricter rules regarding children’s social security numbers for the Child Tax Credit will make it difficult for immigrants to receive the benefit; and inadequate tax incentives for charitable giving.

Federal Court Strikes Texas' "Dismemberment Abortion" Ban

In Whole Woman's Health v. Paxton, (WD TX, Nov. 22, 2017), a Texas federal district court struck down Texas' ban on abortions performed through the standard dilation and evacuation procedure-- a procedure that the Texas law terms "dismemberment abortions."  The court said, in its 27-page opinion:

... [T]he Act prohibits the performance of an outpatient standard D&E abortion unless fetal demise occurs in utero before the fetus is removed from the woman. It is also undisputed that after approximately 15 weeks of pregnancy and before a fetus is viable, nationwide the most common second-trimester abortion is a standard D&E without inducing in utero fetal demise....

... [T]he State's legitimate interest in fetal life does not allow the imposition of an additional medical procedure on the standard D&E abortion  procedure not driven by medical necessity. Here the State's interest must give way to the woman's right. The Act does more than create a structural mechanism by which the State expresses profound respect for the unborn. The Act intervenes in the medical process of abortion prior to viability in an unduly burdensome manner.

Courthouse News reports on the decision. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

UN Criminal Tribunal Convicts Mladić of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity In Bosnian Conflict

Yesterday, in its final Trial Judgment, the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia announced that Ratko Mladić, former Commander of the Bosnian Serb Army, has been found guilty of participating in joint criminal enterprises that committed genocide, crimes against humanity and violations of the laws or customs of war during the years 1992 to 1995.  The Tribunal, after a trial that extended over four years, found Mladić guilty on 10 of the 11 counts brought against him, including his participation in a joint criminal enterprise (JCE) to eliminate the Bosnian Muslims in Srebrenica:

The Chamber found that Mladić intended to carry out the objective of the Srebrenica JCE by destroying the Bosnian Muslims in Srebrenica, by killing the men and boys and forcibly removing the women, young children, and some elderly men. The Chamber therefore found Mladić guilty of genocide, persecution, murder, extermination, and the inhumane act of forcible transfer.

The Tribunal rejected a charge of genocide in other municipalities, though it convicted of crimes against humanity and violations of the laws or customs of war in those municipalities.

The Tribunal sentenced Mladić to life in prison.  The judgment may be appealed to the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals.

The Criminal Tribunal yesterday also released a summary of the trial judgment and videos (Part I, Part II) of the Tribunal's reading of the judgment.  All the documents in the case, including the indictments and the trial transcripts are available online.  Voice of America reports on the decision.

President Trump's Thanksgiving Proclamation

Today is officially Thanksgiving.  The Thanksgiving Day 2017 Proclamation issued last week by President Trump sets the date.  It also recounts the history of the holiday and then goes on, in part, to say:

Today, we continue to celebrate Thanksgiving with a grateful and charitable spirit.  When we open our hearts and extend our hands to those in need, we show humility for the bountiful gifts we have received.  In the aftermath of a succession of tragedies that have stunned and shocked our Nation -- Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria; the wildfires that ravaged the West; and, the horrific acts of violence and terror in Las Vegas, New York City, and Sutherland Springs -- we have witnessed the generous nature of the American people.  In the midst of heartache and turmoil, we are grateful for the swift action of the first responders, law enforcement personnel, military and medical professionals, volunteers, and everyday heroes who embodied our infinite capacity to extend compassion and humanity to our fellow man.  As we mourn these painful events, we are ever confident that the perseverance and optimism of the American people will prevail.

...  We also offer a special word of thanks for the brave men and women of our Armed Forces.... As one people, we seek God's protection, guidance, and wisdom, as we stand humbled by the abundance of our great Nation and the blessings of freedom, family, and faith.

9th Circuit: Religious Sect's Attempt to Extort Land and Recruit May Create Basis For Asylum

In Singh v. Sessions, (9th Cir., Nov. 15, 2017), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of appeals held that an immigration judge was incorrect when he rejected claims for asylum and withholding of removal by Harbans Singh who in India had suffered at the hands of the Dera Sacha Sauda which attempted to extort his land and recruit him for membership.  The court held that this could create a sufficient nexus to find religious or political persecution since "Singh’s refusal to join the DSS was inherently an act of religious expression." The court remanded the case for findings on additional issues. India West reports on the decision.

Another Court Enjoins Trump's Transgender Military Ban

Agreeing with a decision last month by a D.C. federal district court (see prior posting), yesterday in Stone v. Trump, (D MD, Nov. 21, 2017), a Maryland federal district court issued a preliminary injunction against President Trump's ban on transgender individuals serving in the military.  The court said in part:

President Trump’s tweets did not emerge from a policy review, nor did the Presidential Memorandum identify any policymaking process or evidence demonstrating that the revocation of transgender rights was necessary for any legitimate national interest. Based on the circumstances surrounding the President’s announcement and the departure from normal procedure, the Court agrees with the D.C. Court that there is sufficient support for Plaintiffs’ claims that “the decision to exclude transgender individuals was not driven by genuine concerns regarding military efficacy.”

Going beyond the D.C. decision, the court found that plaintiffs have standing to challenge the ban on military spending for sex reassignment surgery and enjoined the Sex Reassignment Surgical Directive as well as the Retention and Accession Directives, pending final resolution of the lawsuit. Washington Post reports on the decision.

Court Refuses To Dismiss Constitutional Challenges To City's Civil Rights Law

In Country Mill Farms v. City of East Lansing, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 191658 (WD MI, Nov. 16, 2017), a Michigan federal district court refused to dismiss a number of plaintiff's constitutional challenges to a city's civil rights ordinance. Vendor Guidelines for East Lansing's Farmers' Market required vendors to comply with the civil rights ordinance as a general business practice. Country Mill Farms was denied a vendor permit because, while it hosts weddings at its orchard, it refuses on religious grounds to host same-sex weddings.  It announced its policy in a Facebook post.

The court allowed Country Mill to move ahead with an overbreadth challenge to a portion of the ordinance, saying in part:

The City is wrong that the Ordinance regulates only conduct. The Ordinance also regulates speech. Section 22-32 of the Code defines "harass" as including "communication which refers to an individual protected under this article." Section 22-31 prohibits harassment of any person based on a list of characteristics. And, Section 22-35(b)(2) prohibits the printing and publishing of certain statements and signs based on their content.

The court also refused to dismiss plaintiff's Free Exercise and Establishment Clause challenges (as well as an unconstitutional conditions challenge), saying in part:

Plaintiffs have alleged sufficient facts to state a plausible claim for a violation of their rights under the Free Exercise Clause. Plaintiffs have pleaded facts to support a claim that the City enacted a generally applicable and neutral policy, which was then used to target Plaintiffs' religiously-motivated conduct. The Ordinance did not apply to Plaintiffs in 2016. After the City learned that Plaintiffs would not hold same-sex weddings on their farms because of Plaintiffs' religious beliefs, the City amended the Vendor Guidelines to incorporate the neutral and generally applicable law and applied it to Plaintiffs. As pled, the City's action is a "veiled cover for targeting belief or a faith-based practice." ...

Plaintiffs have pled sufficient facts to state a plausible claim under the Establishment Clause. The facts in the complaint allow the Court to infer that the predominant purpose of the changes to the Vendor Guidelines was motivated by the disapproval of Plaintiffs' religious beliefs.

Various other challenges to the ordinance were dismissed. (See prior related posting.)

US Asks Supreme Court For Full Stay Pending Appeal of Injunction Against 3rd Travel Ban

As previously reported, a week ago the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals stayed in part the preliminary injunction issued by a Hawaii federal district court against enforcement of President Trump's third travel ban.  Yesterday, the government filed an application (full text) in the case (Trump v. State of Hawaii) seeking to have the preliminary injunction stayed completely while the case works its way through appeals to the 9th Circuit and to the Supreme Court.  According to a report from SCOTUSblog, the Justices have asked the challengers to file a response to the government's application by Nov. 28.

Court Strikes Down Health Clinic Buffer Zone

In Turco v. City of Englewood, New Jersey, (D NJ, Nov. 14, 2017), a New Jersey federal district court struck down as overbroad a city ordinance creating an 8-foot buffer zone around health care and transitional facilities.  The ordinance was a response to militant activists and aggressive protesters who congregated outside an Englewood abortion clinic. The court said in part:

Defendant created a sweeping regulation that burdens the free speech of individuals, not just in front of the Clinic, but at health care and transitional facilities citywide. To meet the narrowly-tailored requirement, Defendant must create an Ordinance that targets the exact wrong it seeks to remedy.

Liberty Counsel issued a press release announcing the decision.

Canadian Christian Couple Sues Over Alberta's Policy On Adoptions

In a lawsuit filed in Canada at the beginning of this month, an Evangelical Christian couple is challenging a decision by the Province of Alberta's Child and Family Services to refuse to approve them to adopt a child.  the refusal stemmed from the couple's Biblical views on marriage, sexuality and gender.  The complaint (full text) in C.D and N.D. v. Province of Alberta, (Q.B. AL, filed 11/1/2017), says that "Child and Family Services considered the Applicants' religious beliefs regarding sexuality a 'rejection' of children with LGBT sexual identities...."  It contends that the decision violates their rights under Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

Public Shelter's "Blessing of the Animals" Challenged In Court

An Atheist group last week filed suit in a New Jersey federal district court challenging a county-run animal shelter's hosting for the second year in a row of a Blessing of the Animals event.  The complaint (full text) in American Atheists, Inc. v. Bergen County, (D NJ, filed 11/13/2017), objects to the use of public resources and employee time to promote and host a ritual that is performed by Franciscan clergy annually in honor of St. Francis of Assissi. Plaintiffs claim that the county has violated the Establishment Clause, the Equal Protection Clause and several provisions of the New Jersey Constitution.  American Atheists issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

Cert. Petition Filed In Suit Over Police Investigation Interference With Prayer

A petition for certiorari (full text) was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court last week in Sause v. Bauer, (cert. filed 11/17/2017).  In the case, the U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed on qualified immunity grounds a suit for damages alleging that police who were investigating a noise complaint violated plaintiff's 1st Amendment rights when an officer who had come to her home ordered her to get up and stop praying. (See prior posting.)  First Liberty issued a press release announcing the filing of the petition for review.

Pro-Life Group Sues Over City's Enforcement of Sign Ordinance

A suit was filed last week in a North Carolina federal district court by an anti-abortion group which contends that the city of Charlotte acted unconstitutionally when it applied an ordinance directed at preventing installation of permanent or semi-permanent signs and flyers in the public right of way to prevent plaintiffs' display of placards. The complaint (full text) in Cities4Life, Inc. v. City of Charlotte, (WD NC, filed 11/17/2017) alleges in part:

Defendants, through their enforcement of City Code § 10-212, prohibit speakers from resting their signs on the ground while they are assembled outside of abortion facilities and thereby restrict Plaintiffs’ right to free speech on significant portions of land. This restriction does not apply to many other types of signs whose content is different from those used by Plaintiffs. Defendants thus unconstitutionally restrict Plaintiffs’ rights because of the pro-life messages their signs convey.

Thomas More Law Center issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Preyanun Steannopkao, Phramaha Boonsri Yanavuddho, Suchao Ploychum & Chamnong Kanthik, An Integration of Buddhadharma in Performing Duties of Thai Lawyers, (PSAKU International Journal of Interdisciplinary Research (PSAKUIJIR), Vol. 5, No. 2, (July-December 2016)).
• Richard Albert & Yaniv Roznai, Religion, Secularism and Limitations on Constitutional Amendment, (Edward Elgar Research Handbook on Law & Religion (Rex Ahdar, editor, 2018 Forthcoming)).
• Gautam Bhatia, Equality of Opportunity, Group Subordination, and the Directive Principles: State of Kerala vs N.M. Thomas, (November 15, 2017).
• Andrew Koppelman, Entertaining Satan: Why We Tolerate Terrorist Incitement, (Fordham Law Review, Vol. 86, No. 2, 2017).
• Timothy Zick, Restroom Use, Civil Rights, and Free Speech ‘Opportunism’, (Ohio State Law Journal, Forthcoming).
• Mohammad Fadel, Fiduciary Principles in Classical Islamic Law Systems, (Oxford Handbook of Fiduciary Law, edited by Robert Sitkoff et. al. (Forthcoming)).
• Asmat Ali Khan, Marrying Without the Consent of the Wali (a Case Study of Pakistan) Compatibility of Pakistani Family Laws with UDHR, (November 8, 2017).

From SmartCILP:

• David B. Rosengard, "Three Hots and a Cot and a Lot of Talk": Discussing Federal Rights-Based Avenues for Prisoner Access to Vegan Meals, 23 Animal Law Review 355-403 (2017).
• John Weber, Protecting Against Discrimination or Violating the Freedom of Religion? Balancing One of Americans' Most Important Liberties, [Abstract],46 Journal of Law & Education 415-424 (2017).

Trump Adds 5 Names To List of Potential Supreme Court Nominees

On Friday, just before White House Counsel Donald F. McGahn delivered the Barbara K. Olson Memorial Lecture at the Federalist Society National Lawyers Convention, the White House issued a release announcing the addition of five names to the President's list of potential Supreme Court nominees. Among the five is Amy Coney Barrett who on Oct. 31 was confirmed for a position on the 7th Circuit after controversy over her views on reproductive rights, abortion, LGBTQ rights, as well as controversy over her statement in a 1988 law review article urging Catholic judges to recuse themselves in capital cases because of Catholic teaching opposing capital punishment. (See prior posting.) Other new names on the President's list are: Britt C. Grant (Georgia Supreme Court Justice); Brett M. Kavanaugh (Judge on the D.C. Circuit);  Kevin C. Newsom (11th Circuit Judge); and Patrick Wyrick (Oklahoma Supreme Court Justice).  The Hill reports on these developments.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Grief v. Quay,  (2d Cir., Nov. 13, 2017), the 2nd Circuit concluded that a district court should not have dismissed as conclusively non-religious an inmate's claim that stuffed animals are necessary for his religious practice.

In Holt v. Givens, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 186752 (ND AL, Nov. Nov. 13, 2017),  an Alabama federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 187165, Oct. 17, 2017) and dismissed an inmate's complaint that his prayer oil was seized as contraband.

In Moon v. Jordan, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 187012 (ED MO, Nov. 13, 2017), a Missouri federal district court dismissed a Muslim inmate's complaint that he was not provided an Arabic language Qur'an, a clock for prayer time, a prayer rug, a bottle for cleaning himself after using the restroom, televised Jumu'ah services, or an Imam, and was not permitted to wear a Kufi.

In Bynum v. Poole, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 187453 (MD NC, No. 13, 2017), a North Carolina federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing a Muslim inmate's complaint that Jumu'ah services were cancelled on one Friday.

In Hewitt v. Johnson, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 187649 (D SC, Nov. 14, 2017), a South Carolina federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 187901, Oct. 26, 2017) and dismissed on qualified immunity grounds denial of an inmate's request for a kosher diet because authorities found his professed belief insincere.

In Muslim v. Carmichael, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 188522 (WD NC, Nov. 14, 2017), a North Carolina federal district court allowed a Muslim inmate to move ahead wit his damage claim for denial of a Kosher diet and failure to provide an Imam to lead prayer services.

In Johnson v. Fields, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 189448 (WD NC, Nov. 16, 2017), a North Carolina federal district court upheld disciplinary sanctions that deprived an inmate of his Bible for 24 days.

In Meza v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 189996 (ED CA, Nov. 15, 2017), a California federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing a Catholic inmate's complaint that because of his alleged gang affiliation he was not allowed to attend his brother's funeral off prison grounds.

In Shabazz v. Secretary Department of Corrections, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 190725 (MD FL, Nov. 17, 2017), a Florida federal district court issued a temporary restraining order preventing prison authorities from requiring an inmate to shave his beard that he wears for religious reasons.

Sacristan's Suit Dismissed On Ministerial Exception Grounds

In Vosney v. Archdiocese of Hartford, 2017 Conn. Super. LEXIS 4633 (CT Super., Oct. 13, 2017), a Connecticut trial court dismissed on "ministerial exception" grounds a suit by a former administrative assistant and sacristan of a Catholic Church in Connecticut. Plaintiff had claimed that his hours of employment were severely reduced as retaliation for his opposing discriminatory employment practices.

Head of DHS Faith Based Office Resigns Over Anti-Muslim, Anti-Black Statements

CNN reports that Rev. Jamie Johnson resigned yesterday as head of the Department of Homeland Security's Center for Faith-Based & Neighborhood Partnerships.  His resignation stems from inflammatory statements about Blacks and Muslims which Johnson made in radio appearances in years prior to his appointment to his position at DHS.  For example, in one appearance he said in part:

I agree with Dinesh D'Souza, your friend and mine, who says really all that Islam has ever given us is oil and dead bodies over the last millennia and a half.

Court Upholds Large Penalty Against Jehovah's Witnesses For Failure To Produce Documents

In Padron v. Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc., (CA App., Nov. 9, 2017), a California appellate court upheld a $4000 per day penalty against a Jehovah's Witness parent body for its refusal  to comply with a litigation discovery request.  At issue is a litigant's attempt to obtain copies of responses to a letter sent to elders around the country seeking names of congregation leaders who are known to have been guilty of child molestation in the past.  The total amount now due is some $2 million.  Reveal reports on the decision.

Elaborate Museum of The Bible Opens In D.C. Today

Washington Post reports that the new $500 million privately-funded Museum of the Bible opens in Washington, D.C. today.  The museum has been created by the Green family, owners of the Hobby Lobby retail chain.  Located on a site near the Mall in southwest Washington, the Museum focuses the importance of the Bible, Biblical history and the place of the Bible in U.S. history.  The Post says that the Museum "will set a new standard" for fusion of entertainment and education. It summarizes:

The Bible Museum has come to town, in all its technical splendor, bearing with it something that most historians and museum professionals may have thought was long discredited: the "master narrative" idea of history, that there is one sweeping human story that needs to be told, a story that is still unfolding and carrying us along with it. It tells this seductive story well, in many places with factual accuracy, and always with an eye to clarity and entertainment. It is an exciting idea, and an enormously powerful tool for making sense of the world.

Unless, of course, you don’t believe it.

Former Church Members Question Settlement of Suit Against Child Protection Officials

Former members of the North Carolina-based World of Faith Fellowship (WOFF) will ask the North Carolina attorney general to seek review a settlement agreement reached 12 years ago in a suit against the Rutherford County Department of Social Services by 12 members of WOFF. The plaintiffs claimed they were being targeted by Social Services because of their religion. AP now reports:

An ongoing Associated Press investigation has exposed years of abuse in the evangelical sect, with dozens of former members saying congregants are regularly beaten, punched and choked in an effort to "purify" sinners.

... [T]he state had opposed the agreement between Word of Faith and the county social services agency because it contains stipulations that limit such investigative tactics as what can trigger an abuse inquiry and how social workers can question minors....

Several former members have told the AP that [child protection director] Carroll’s department has either cited the settlement in refusing to act on child abuse allegations or given Word of Faith members advance notice of investigations.

Suit Challenges Tennessee's Therapist Bill

A suit was filed last week in a Tennessee federal district court challenging the constitutionality of  Tennessee's "Therapist Bill" (TN Code 63-22-302) that provides:

No counselor or therapist providing counseling or therapy services shall be required to counsel or serve a client as to goals, outcomes, or behaviors that conflict with the sincerely held principles of the counselor or therapist; provided, that the counselor or therapist coordinates a referral of the client to another counselor or therapist who will provide the counseling or therapy.

The complaint (full text) in Copas v. Haslam, (MD TN, filed 11/13/2017) contends that, despite the broad wording of the section:

The Tennessee Legislature intended for the Bill solely to allow religious counselors to discriminate against the LGBT community.

It asserts that the law violates the Equal Protection Clause and the Establishment Clause.  JURIST reports on the lawsuit.

OSCE Holds Hearings On Religious Freedom Violations

The U.S. Helsinki Commission (the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe) yesterday held a briefing at the Russell Senate Office Building on Religious Freedom Violations in the OSCE.  A video of the full briefing is available on the Commission's website.

USCIRF Says State Department Is Late In Designating "Countries of Particular Concern"

The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom issued a press release on Tuesday criticizing the State Department for failing to meet the statutory deadline for designating "countries of particular concern".  The International Religious Freedom Act (22 USC 6442 as amended in 2016) requires the President to designate countries of particular concern-- those that are the most egregious violators of religious freedom-- within 90 days of the issuance of the State Department's Annual Report on International Religious Freedom.  The State Department issued this year's Annual Report on Aug. 15. (See prior posting.)

Australian Government Survey By Mail Favors Same-Sex Marriage

The Australian Bureau of Statistics yesterday released the results of its national postal survey on whether the law should be changed to allow same-sex marriage.  (Press release; full survey results).  61.6% of respondents voted "yes"; 38.4% voted "no".  The press release expanded on the data:

All states and territories recorded a majority Yes response. Of the 150 Federal Electoral Divisions, 133 recorded a majority Yes response, and 17 Federal Electoral Divisions recorded a majority No response.

12,727,920 million people participated in the voluntary survey – representing 79.5 per cent of the more than 16 million eligible Australians.

CNN reports that celebrations broke out across Australia after the results were announced.  (See prior related posting.)

Bible In Schools Case Dismissed On Standing and Ripeness Grounds

In Freedom From Religion Foundation v. Mercer County board of Education, (SD WV, Nov. 14, 2017), a West Virginia federal district court dismissed on standing and ripeness grounds a lawsuit challenging a Bible in Schools class offered for over 70 years in Mercer County elementary and middle schools.  Shortly after the lawsuit challenging the program was filed, the county Board of Education voted to suspend teaching of the course for a least a year in order to undertake a review and modification of the curriculum.  While one plaintiff who transferred to another school was found to lack standing, other plaintiffs had standing.  The court nevertheless dismissed because:

the Bible in the Schools program of which plaintiffs’ complain is not currently offered nor will it be offered in the future. Furthermore, should a Bible in the Schools curriculum reemerge, the court has no information before it to determine the content of such a class.... Therefore, until the Bible in the Schools curriculum that Jamie Doe will actually encounter "is presented in clean-cut and concrete form,"... this action is not ripe for judicial review.

FFRF issued a press release announcing the decision. First Liberty also issued a press release on the decision.

Ontario Court Holds Mahr Is Part of Family Property In Divorce

In Bakhshi v. Hosseinzadeh,(Ont. Ct. App., Nov. 2, 2017), the Ontario Court of appeal held that the Mahr in an Islamic marriage contract is to be counted as part of net family property.  The Family Law Act in the Canadian province of Ontario calls for equal division of family-owned property in a divorce.  Here the marriage contract called for the husband to pay the wife 230 gold coins (found by the court to be worth $79,580).  The Court of Appeals held that the wife is entitled to receive the Mahr payment from her husband, but that (absent a provision to the contrary in the marriage contract) this amount is then to be included as family-owned property in the equalization calculation. Law Times reports on the decision.

New Suit Challenges Latest Limits on Refugees From 11 Countries

A lawsuit was filed yesterday in a Washington federal district court challenging the Oct. 24 Executive Order that resumes the admission of refugees to the United States, but with increased vetting of those from 11 countries. (See prior posting.)  The 44-page complaint (full text) in Jewish family Services of Seattle v. Trump, (WD WA, filed 11/13/2017) contends:

Refugee Ban 3.0 implements defendant Donald Trump’s and his Administration’s often repeated goal of banning Muslim refugees from the country. Of all Muslim refugees resettled in the United States in the last two fiscal years, 80% were from the nine Muslim majority countries whose nationals are subject to this most recent suspension.

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

Injunction Against Trump's 3rd Travel Ban Is Lifted In Part

In State of Hawaii v. Trump, (9th Cir., Nov. 13, 2017), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals stayed in part the preliminary injunction issued by a Hawaii federal district court against enforcement of President Trump's third travel ban. (See prior posting.)  The 9th Circuit held:

The preliminary injunction is stayed except as to “foreign nationals who have a credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States....

The injunction remains in force as to foreign nationals who have a “close familial relationship” with a person in the United States.... Such persons include grandparents, grandchildren, brothers-in-law, sisters-in-law, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, and cousins.... “As for entities, the relationship must be formal, documented, and formed in the ordinary course, rather than for the purpose of evading [Proclamation 9645].”

Reuters reports on the decision.

FBI Releases 2016 Hate Crime Data

Yesterday, the FBI released its Hate Crime Statistics 2016.  During the year, 6,121 hate crime incidents (including 6,063 single-bias incidents) were reported to law enforcement authorities.  This compares to 5,850 total incidents in 2015 (see prior posting). The 2016 data shows that 21% of the single-bias incidents (1,273 incidents) were motivated by religious bias. 684 of those incidents were anti-Jewish (up from 664 in 2015).  307 incidents were anti-Muslim (up from 257 in 2015). 62 were anti-Catholic (same as 2015).  ADL has created an interactive map illustrating the data.

Supreme Court Grants Review In Pregnancy Center Required Disclosure Case

The U.S. Supreme Court today granted certiorari in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra, (Docket No. 16-1140, cert granted 11/13/2017) (Order List).  In the case, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld  California's FACT Act which requires licensed pregnancy counseling clinics to disseminate a notice on the existence of publicly-funded family planning services, including contraception and abortion.  Unlicensed clinics must disseminate a notice that they and their personnel are unlicensed. (See prior posting.) The Supreme Court limited its grant of review to the Free Speech issues, excluding review of Free Exercise challenges.  SCOTUSblog's case page has links to the cert. petition and amicus briefs filed in the case.  The 9th Circuit in the case held that the required disclosures are regulation of "professional speech" subject only to intermediate scrutiny.  Washington Post reports on the Court's grant of review.

Cert. Filed In Challenge To Abortion Clinic Anti-Noise Law

A petition for certiorari (full text) was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court last week in March v. Mills, (cert. filed 11/6/2017).  In the case, the U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a provision of the Maine Civil Rights Act that prohibits a person making noise that can be heard within a health care facility where the intent is to jeopardize health or interfere with the delivery of health services.  In March v. Mills, (1st Cir., Aug. 8, 2017), the appeals court rejected a constitutional challenge brought by an abortion protester who is the pastor and co-founder of a church whose mission was described as including "plead[ing] for the lives of the unborn at the doorsteps of abortion facilities." The 1st Circuit held that the Noise Provision is a content-neutral time, place and manner restriction. Thomas More Law Center issued a press release announcing the filing of the petition for review.

Recent Articles and Books of Interest

From SSRN:

• Catherine E. Smith, et. al., Brief of Amici Curiae Scholars of The Constitutional Rights and Interests Of Children in Support of Respondents in Masterpiece Cakeshop LTD, et al v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, (U Denver Legal Studies Research Paper, Working Paper No. 17-39 (Nov. 2017)).
• Ian S. Speir, 'A Beacon on Our Coast': Religious Freedom as the First Freedom at Home and Abroad, (Providence, Forthcoming).
• Sahar F. Aziz, A Muslim Registry: The Precursor to Internment?, (Brigham Young University Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Antony Barone Kolenc, Putting Faith in Europe: Should the U.S. Supreme Court Learn from the European Court of Human Rights?, (Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, Vol. 45, No. 1, 2016).
• Luke W. Goodrich & Rachel N. Busick, Sex, Drugs, and Eagle Feathers: An Empirical Study of Federal Religious Freedom Cases, (Seton Hall Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Holning Lau & Hillary Li, American Equal Protection and Global Convergence, (Fordham Law Review, Vol. 86, 2017).

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

• Rung-Guang Lin, Towards Religious Institutionalism? The Future of the Regulation of Religious Institutions in Taiwan, (November 5, 2017).
• Masua Sagiv, The State and New Religious Movements, (Contemporary Alternative Spiritualities in Israel 115 (Shai Feraro and James R. Lewis eds., 2017)).
• Margaret D. Hagan, Human Rights Melodrama: A Literary Analysis of Reports of Police Violence Against Hungarian Roms, (Journal of Human Rights, Taylor and Francis, Pages 401-415 (2016).
• Ido Katri, The Banishment of Isaac: Racial Signifiers of Gender Performance, (University of Toronto Law Journal 68:1(2017)).

From SmartCILP and elsewhere:

• Mark Strasser, Neutrality, Accommodation, and Conscience Clause Legislation, 8 Alabama Civil Rights & Civil Liberties Law Review 197-238 (2017).
• Emma Green, The Quiet Religious-Freedom Fight That Is Remaking America, The Atlantic (Nov. 5, 2017).

Recent & Forthcoming Books:

• S.I. Strong, Transforming Religious Liberties: A New Theory of Religious Rights for National and International Legal Systems, (Cambridge Univ. Press, Oct. 2017).
• Michel Rosenfeld & Susanna Mancini, The Conscience Wars: Rethinking the Balance between Religion, Identity, and Equality, (Cambridge Univ. Press, March 2018).

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Garner v. Muenchow, (7th Cir., Nov. 8, 2017), the 7th Circuit reversed a Wisconsin federal district court grant of summary judgment for defendants in a suit in which a Muslim inmate alleged free exercise and equal protection violations growing out of efforts to prevent him from obtaining a copy of the Qur'an while in segregation.

In Cavin v. Heyns, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 22582 (6th Cir., Sept. 12, 2017), the 6th Circuit affirmed a finding of qualified immunity in a suit by an inmate challenging a blanket ban on attendance at religious services for prisoners on toplock status.

In Broyles v. Presley, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182968 (D KA, Nov. 3, 2017), a Kansas federal district court held that plaintiff had stated a free exercise claim regarding his inability to receive a kosher diet.  The court ordered relevant jail officials to investigate the facts, determine what action should be taken and file this as a report along with defendants' answer.

In Sears v. Thomas, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 186498 (SD FL, Nov. 8, 2017), a Florida federal district court rejected part of a magistrate's recommendation (2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137998, Aug. 25, 2017) and held that an inmate can proceed with his claim for nominal damages against a correctional officer who insisted that a chain and crucifix discovered in plaintiff's cell must be returned to the vendor who sent it.

Challenge To FEMA Policy On Disaster Aid To Churches Moves Ahead

In Harvest Family Church v. Federal Emergency Management Agency, (SD TX, Nov. 9, 2017), a Texas federal district court refused to grant FEMA a 30-day stay in a suit by three churches challenging FEMA's policy denying disaster aid to houses of worship.  FEMA, which refused defend the merits of its policy before the court, sought the stay because it is reconsidering the policy.  The court said it will delay a ruling on plaintiffs' request for a temporary injunction until December 1.  It added:

The Court has received instructive briefing from amici in support of Plaintiffs’ Motion, for which it expresses gratitude. Nevertheless ... “Without opponents, the adversary system cannot function.”... The Court would therefore welcome amici with differing views.

If, by December 1, FEMA’s position remains unchanged, the Court will assume that FEMA concedes, at the very least, Plaintiffs’ likelihood of success on the merits of this case and that the injury being suffered by Plaintiffs is irreparable. The Court will then issue its ruling on Plaintiffs’ request for preliminary relief.

Senate Republicans' Version of Tax Bill Retains Johnson Amendment Restrictions

As previously reported, the tax cut legislation introduced by Republicans in the House of Representatives eliminates some of the restrictions on political speech by non-profits currently imposed by the Johnson Amendment.  Senate Republicans have drafted their own version of a tax bill.  As reported by The Hill, Republicans on Thursday released a 253- page description of the bill (full text), though not the full legislative language.  It does not appear that the Senate is proposing any change to the Johnson Amendment's current restrictions on political intervention by non-profits. The Senate bill is scheduled for markup by the Finance Committee on Nov. 13.

NY Voters Approve Kiryas Joel Becoming Separate Town

JTA reports on Tuesday's election results in the town of Monroe, New York where voters by over an 80% majority approved a proposal that will allow the Village of Kiryas Joel to secede and become its own separate Yiddish speaking town. The vote resolves tensions growing out of Kiryas Joel's annexation of land from Monroe. (See prior posting.)  Kiryas Joel was founded by Satmar Rebbe Joel Teitelbaum. The new town will be named Town of Palm Tree, an English translation of "Teitelbaum".  It will be New York's first new town in 35 years.

Judge Says Suit Charging Campus Anti-Semitism Should be Refiled With Focus On Current Situation

Jewish News of Northern California reports that after a 57-minute pretrial hearing in Mandel v. Board of Trustees of the California State University, federal district court Judge William Orrick said he would dismiss the case with leave to amend. The suit alleges that  "a consistent pattern of anti-Jewish animus has emerged" at San Francisco State University since 1968. (See prior posting.)  The judge instructed that an amended complaint should focus on the current situation at SFSU, not on a 50-year history of anti-Semitism there.

9th Circuit Hears Oral Arguments In School Board Invocation Case

Yesterday the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments (video of full oral arguments) in Freedom From Religion foundation v. Chino Unified School District. In the case, a California federal district court held that invocations at school board meetings are governed by case law relating to school prayer, not by the line of cases on legislative prayer.  Courthouse News Service reports on the oral arguments.

Missouri Offers State Employees Health Policies That Exclude Abortion, Contraception, Sterilization

As previously reported, last year a Missouri federal district court in Wieland v. HHS enjoined the federal government from enforcing the Affordable Care Act against a state legislator who, on religious grounds, objected to participating in a healthcare plan for himself, his wife and his daughters that provides coverage for contraceptives.  Now according to a press release from the Thomas More Society, the state of Missouri has begun to offer all state employees the option of selecting a health insurance plan that excludes coverage for abortion, contraceptives or sterilization.

Marked-Up House Version of Tax Bill Includes Expanded, But Time-Limited, Partial Repeal of Johnson Amendment

The House Ways and Means Committee today during its markup of HR 1, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, approved an amendment (full text) that, if finally adopted, will expand the partial repeal of the Johnson Amendment that was in the original version, but will revert to the current Johnson Amendment after 5 years. (See prior posting.)  The original version would have permitted houses of worship to include political endorsement in sermons by clergy.  The amended version that now goes to the full House expands that to allow political endorsements in statements by any Section 501(c)(3) organization when the statement is made in the ordinary course of its exempt activities without incurring additional expense.  Here is the amended text of the section, marked up by me to show additions and deletions from the original HR 1:

SEC. 5201. CHURCHES 501 (c)(3) ORGANIZATIONS PERMITTED TO MAKE STATEMENTS RELATING TO POLITICAL CAMPAIGN IN ORDINARY COURSE OF RELIGIOUS SERVICES AND ACTIVITIES.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 501 is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

"(s) SPECIAL RULE RELATING TO POLITICAL CAMPAIGN STATEMENTS OF CHURCHES, INTEGRATED AUXILIARIES, ETC. ORGANIZATIONS DESCRIBED IN SUBSECTION (c)(3) —

(1) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of subsection (c)(3) and sections 170(c)(2), 2055, 2106, 2522, and 4955, an organization described in section 508(c)(1)(A) shall not fail to be treated as organized and operated exclusively for a religious purpose purpose described in subsection (c)(3), nor shall it be deemed to have participated in, or intervened in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office, solely because of the content of any homily, sermon, teaching, dialectic, or other presentation made during religious services or gatherings, but only if the preparation and presentation of such content content of any statement which—

(A) is in is made in the ordinary course of the organization’s regular and customary activities in carrying out its exempt purpose, and

(B) results in the organization incurring not more than de minimis incremental expenses.

 (2) TERMINATION.—Paragraph (1) shall not apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2023. 

(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by this section shall apply to taxable years ending after the date of the enactment of this Act beginning after December 31, 2018."

[Thanks to Samuel Brunson via Religionlaw for the lead.] 

Republican Senators Call For Roy Moore To Withdraw From Senate Race After Sex Charges

According to the Washington Post, a number of Republican senators are calling for Roy Moore, Alabama candidate for the U.S. Senate, to withdraw if charges in an earlier Washington Post article today are true.  The article, based on detailed interviews with named accusers, says that Moore engaged in improper sexual contact with a 14-year old girl nearly 40 years ago when Moore was a 32 year-old assistant district attorney.  Three other women say Moore tried to date them when they were between 16 and 18 years old.  Moore, well known for his battles defending a Ten Commandments monument and opposing same-sex marriage, says that the charges "are completely false and are a desperate political attack by the National Democrat Party and the Washington Post."  The special election in Alabama in which Moore faces Democratic nominee Doug Jones is scheduled for Dec. 12.

UPDATE: Defending Moore, Alabama State Auditor Jim Zeigler told the Washington Examiner:  "[T]ake Joseph and Mary. Mary was a teenager and Joseph was an adult carpenter. They became parents of Jesus. There’s just nothing immoral or illegal here. Maybe just a little bit unusual."

Italian Artist Charged With Criminal Blasphemy

The art blog Hyperallergic this week reports that in Italy, the anonymous artist known as Hogre was arrested and charged with publicly insulting religion in violation of Sec. 403 (Criminal Blasphemy) of Italy's Criminal Code.  According to the blog's report:

Hogre was one of two artists who, on June 1 of this year, placed satirical posters in bus stop advertising spaces in the Italian capital. Hogre’s poster “Ecce homo erectus” depicts Jesus with a conspicuous erection, resting one hand on the head of a praying, kneeling child. This was a response to sexual abuse charges against Cardinal Pell, the third highest-ranking Vatican official.

If convicted, the artist could face a fine of €1000 to €5000.  Hyperallergic's blog post includes a photo of the offending poster.

House Holds Hearing On Campus Anti-Semitism

On Nov. 7, the House Judiciary Committee held a hearing titled Examining Anti-Semitism on College Campuses.  A video of the full hearing and written transcripts of the prepared testimony of nine witnesses are available on the committee's website.  As reported by AP, following the hearing Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) proposed legislation to expand Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act to bar discrimination on the basis of religion by programs receiving federal financial assistance.  Currently Title VI only bars discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin.

Organization Launches Annual "Friend or Foe Christmas" Campaign

The advocacy organization Liberty Counsel announced yesterday that it is launching its 15th annual "Friend or Foe Christmas Campaign."  Its campaign attempts to counter removal of the celebration of Christmas in schools, on public property and by retailers.  It has made available a Legal Memorandum on Public Celebration of Religious Holidays.

Indonesian Constitutional Court Requires Recognition of Indigenous Religions

According to an AP report, yesterday Indonesia's Constitutional Court handed down a ruling that will require recognition of adherents of the country's indigenous religions.  In the past, Indonesian law has required citizens in obtaining an identity card to select one of six religions-- Islam, Protestantism, Catholicism, Buddhism, Hinduism or Confucianism.  If they selected none of these, they risked prosecution under Indonesia's blasphemy law for being an atheist. Yesterday's ruling concluded that this arrangement is discriminatory.  According to the Jakarta Globe: "The Court recommended the creation of a seventh category – 'believers of the faith,' or penghayat kepercayaan.a'"

Suit Challenges Quebec's New Anti-Niqab Law

As announced by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, a suit was filed in a Quebec Superior Court yesterday challenging the constitutionality of Sec. 10 of Quebec's recently enacted Religious Neutrality Law (see prior posting).  The law provides that public sector employees in carrying out their functions may not cover their faces, and that private citizens must have their faces uncovered when receiving public services.  The complaint (full text) in National Council of Canadian Muslims v. Attorney General of Quebec, (Que. Super., filed 11/7/2017) contends that Sec. 10 of the violates freedom of religion and equality protections of the Quebec and Canadian Charters of Rights and Freedoms.  It asserts that the Act's requirement particularly impacts Muslim women.

Notre Dame, In About Face, Will Continue Contraceptive Coverage Under Accommodation Rules

Reversing an announcement made last month (see prior posting), Notre Dame University yesterday told employees that they will continue to receive health insurance contraceptive coverage.  Under accommodation rules developed by the Obama Administration, the coverage is provided without cost by the insurance company directly to employees, without Notre Dame paying for it.  As reported by AP, the university thought that its insurer would end the no-cost coverage now that changes in Affordable Care Act rules allow religious non-profits to opt out of objectionable coverage. However the insurer has indicated that it will continue to provide the coverage.  A Notre Dame spokesman said:

Recognizing ... the plurality of religious and other convictions among its employees, [the University] will not interfere with the provision of contraceptives that will be administered and funded independently of the University.

In a similar reversal, Notre Dame also told students yesterday that after August they will still be able to obtain contraceptive coverage by electing it separately through their student health plan.

UPDATE: Since Notre Dame has a self-insured plan, references to "insurer" should be read as a reference to the third party administrator and benefits manager.  Sycamore Trust, an alumni group dedicated to preserving Notre Dame's Catholic identity strongly criticized the university's action.

6th Circuit Dismisses Challenge To Michigan Procedures For Vaccination Exemption

In Nikolao v. Lyon, (6th Cir., Nov. 7, 2017), the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ordered dismissal of a challenge to Michigan's procedures for granting school children a religious exemption from vaccination requirements. In order to obtain an exemption, a parent is required to visit the local health department and explain the basis for the objection.  A health worker must certify that the parent has received education on the benefits of immunizations and the risks involved in not receiving them.  Also the state has published a series of "Waiver Notes" containing responses to parental objections, including religious objections.  The court held that plaintiff, a mother who asserted her Catholic religious beliefs as the basis for the request, lacked standing to raise a free exercise claim, saying in part:

While Nikolao has presented facts suggesting that she was exposed to religious information with which she did not agree, she has given no indication that the information coerced her into doing or not doing anything. Nikolao went to the WCDH to receive a vaccination exemption and left with one.

The court found that plaintiff did have standing to assert an Establishment Clause claim, but concluded that no Establishment Clause violation was shown, saying in part:

The Certification Rule only requires local health workers to have a conversation with objecting parents.... As part of that conversation, the state may offer its own take on a parent’s objections. But the Certification Rule does not allow state officials to withhold an exemption based on the legitimacy of those objections. Were that the case, the outcome here may very well be different....

Similarly, the Religious Waiver Note does not violate the Establishment Clause. The Note outlines a health department worker’s available responses to religious objections concerning vaccination. To be sure, this document contains information about specific religions.... But, again, the purpose of providing this information is secular.

[Thanks to Tom Rutledge for the lead.]

USDA Memo Gives Meat Packing Plants Broad Religious Speech Protection

ADF reported yesterday on a new Guidance Memorandum on First Amendment Policy issued by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Office of Food Safety (full text), and a related Q&A webpage.  While the Guidance Memorandum appears to flow from President Trump's Executive Order Promoting Free Speech and Religious Liberty issued in May (see prior posting), and a follow-on Memo from the Secretary of Agriculture, it also resolves a particular dispute relating to a Michigan meat-packing plant. Federal meat inspectors working at the plant had removed an article placed on the plant's break room table that expressed religious views opposed to same-sex marriage.  Apparently a USDA official, invoking an Obama-era Policy Statement on sexual harassment,  had threatened to withdraw all its inspectors if the article reappeared.  The new Guidance Memorandum gives broad permission for employees and supervisors at meat plants to express religious views, saying in part:

Employees are permitted to engage in religious expression directed at fellow employees and may attempt to persuade other employees of the correctness of their views.  Religious views should be treated the same as any other comparable speech not involving religion. Proselytizing is as entitled to constitutional protection as any other form of speech.

Supervisors are also free to engage in speech about religion.  While supervisors may not impose unfair work conditions on employees who do not share their religious beliefs, their personal views concerning religion are still protected by the First Amendment.  As a result, supervisors may also express their sincere religious views without fear of sanctions.

Some employers in facilities that are inspected by USDA may wish to display religious icons, religious pamphlets, or faith-based messages in publicly available work areas or on public websites.  Others may support employee religious organizations and openly express their own religious beliefs or practices in the workplace.  USDA employees must act to avoid the limiting or chilling of protected speech.

The Guidance Memorandum adds that USDA employees who believe they are subject to discrimination, harassment or intimidation may still exercise their rights.

University's Anti-Harassment Policy Upheld Over Prof's Free Speech Claims

In Board of Trustees of Purdue University v. Eisenstein, (IN App., Oct. 30, 2017), and Indiana Court of Appeals held that a trial court should have dismissed a lawsuit brought by an associate professor at Purdue University Calumet against the university, its board of trustees and several of its faculty members.  Associate Professor Maurice Eisenstein was accused by several students and faculty of making anti-Muslim and anti-Black statements in his Introduction to Judaism class and in Facebook postings.  A number of students and faculty, as well as the Muslim Student Association, filed harassment complaints against Eisenstein.  Subsequently Eisenstein made derogatory comments to two of the faculty who had complained, and they filed additional charges of retaliation.  The university ultimately upheld only the retaliation claims.  Eisenstein then sued claiming, among other things, that the university's retaliation policy is unconstitutionally vague and that his free speech rights were infringed. He also alleged breach of contract and other claims. In a 42-page opinion, the court rejected Eisenstein's claims on a number of grounds.  Inside Higher Ed reports on the decision.

Canada's Supreme Court Hears Arguments In Ecclesiastical Abstention Case

On Nov. 2, the Supreme Court of Canada heard oral argument (video of full oral arguments) in Judicial Committee of the Highwood Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses v. Wall.  Links to the briefs of the parties and a number of intervenors are also available online.  ReligiousLiberty.tv reports on the case.  In the case, the Alberta Court of Appeals in a 2-1 decision held that Canadian civil courts have jurisdiction to review a formal decision by a Jehovah's Witness congregation to disfellowship one of its members. (See prior posting.)  [Thanks to Michael Peabody for the lead.]

Trump Sends Holiday Greetings To Sikhs

On Nov. 4, the White House released a statement (full text) from President Trump sending "warm wishes to Sikh Americans and Sikhs around the world as they celebrate the birth anniversary of Guru Nanak Devji, the founder and first guru of Sikhism."

Recent Articles and Books of Interest

From SSRN:

• Scott Skinner-Thompson, The First Queer Right, (Michigan Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Michael A. Helfand, Implied Consent: A Primer and a Defense, (Connecticut Law Review, Vol. 50, Forthcoming).
• Yinka Olomojobi, Explaining the Osmosis of Identity Threats and Religious Violence, (October 31, 2017).
• Anna Su, Varieties of Burden in Religious Accommodations, (October 27, 2017).
• Lisa Mathews, Hobby Lobby and Hobbs to the Rescue: Clarifying Rluipa’s Confusing Substantial Burden Test for Land-Use Cases, (George Mason Law Review, Vol. 24, No. 4, 2017).
• Maureen Johnson, Trickle-Down Bullying and the Truly Great American Response: Can Responsible Rhetoric in Judicial Advocacy and Decision-Making Help Heal the Divisiveness of the Trump Presidency?, (25:4 American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law 445 (2017)).
• Shahbaz Ahmad Cheema, Mulla's Principles of Mahomedan Law in Pakistani Courts: Undoing/Unraveling the Colonial Enterprise?, (October 21, 2017).

From SmartCILP:

• Milena Sterio, Individual Criminal Responsibility for the Destruction of Religious and Historic Buildings: The Al Mahdi Case, 49 Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law 63-73 (2017).

Recent and Forthcoming Books:

• Michele F. Margolis,  From Politics to the Pews: How Partisanship and the Political Environment Shape Religious Identity, (Univ. of Chicago Press, (June 2018).
• Rumee Ahmed, Sharia Compliant: A User's Guide to Hacking Islamic Law, (Stanford Univ. Press, May 2018).
• Matthew Bowman, Christian: The Politics of a Word in America, (Harvard Univ. Press, April 2018).
• Martyn Frampton, The Muslim Brotherhood and the West: A History of Enmity and Engagement, (Belknap Press, Feb. 2018).
• Stephen E. Strang, God and Donald Trump, (Charisma House, Nov. 2017).
• Murat Akan, The Politics of Secularism: Religion, Diversity, and Institutional Change in France and Turkey, (Columbia Univ. Press, Sept. 2017).
• Ahmad Atif Ahmad, Islamic Law: Cases, Authorities and Worldview, (Bloomsbury Publishing, May 2017).

Citizenship Applicant Challenges "So Help Me God" In Naturalization Oath

Represented by activist Michael Newdow, a French citizen who is a permanent U.S. resident living in Massachusetts filed suit last week challenging the inclusion of the phrase "so held me God" in the Naturalization Oath. The complaint (full text) in Perrier-Bilbo v. Congress of the United States, (D MA, filed 11/2/2017), contends that the presence of these words in the oath violates the Establishment Clause, free exercise clause, RFRA, as well as plaitiff's due process and equal protection rights.  The citizenship application by Plaintiff, who is an atheist, was approved in 2009.  When she objected to the form of the oath at that time, was told that she could either participate in the oath ceremony and omit the “so help me God” language, or schedule a private oath ceremony where the government would not use that phrase. Neither of those alternatives are acceptable to her.  Her complaint contends in part:

By its very nature, an oath that concludes “so help me God” is asserting that God exists..... Moreover, even if the current oath were constitutional, the government of the United States has rendered Plaintiff, on the basis of her sincerely held religious beliefs, unable to take the oath that all others take. This is unfair, demeaning and improper. Plaintiff is unwilling to start her new life as an American citizen in some second-class status solely because she chooses to follow her religious precepts. Under the principles of equal protection, she demands the right to experience the elation, the pride, the sense of camaraderie, and the sense of belonging, which comes from joining her fellow new citizens as an equal participant in the naturalization oath ceremony.

Sacramento Bee reports on the lawsuit.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Bethel v. Jenkins, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 22061 (6th Cir., Sept. 22, 2017), the 6th Circuit held that a district court correctly dismissed an Establishment Clause challenge, but should not have dismissed a free speech and procedural due process challenge, to a policy that barred inmate from receiving printed material ordered by a third party even directly from an approved vendor.

In Hargrove v. Holley, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 180284 (SD OH, Oct. 31, 2017), an Ohio federal magistrate judge recommended dismissal of an inmate's claim that compelled schooling without an Islamic curriculum violates his free exercise rights.

In Harris v. Cooper, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 181249 (ND CA, Nov. 1, 2017), a California federal magistrate judge allowed an inmate to move ahead against certain defendants with his claim that in a cell search his religious materials were confiscated as retaliation and part of a conspiracy to deny him parole because he is a Muslim.

In Maciejka v. Williams, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182842 (SD L, Nov. 2, 2017), a Florida federal magistrate judge recommended ordering plaintiff, a former inmate, to file an amended complaint if he wishes to move ahead with his rambling allegations that while confined he was kept from attending Catholic religious services, and could not celebrate holidays, see chaplains or priests or keep religious publications and religious items such as a rosary and scapular.

Ecclesiastical Abstention Doctrine Does Not Bar School Administrator's Contract Claim

In Saint Augustine School v. Cropper, (KY Sup. Ct., Nov. 2, 2017), the Kentucky Supreme Court held that the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine does not prevent the former lay administrator of a Catholic elementary school from asserting a breach-of-contract claim, saying in part:

Saint Augustine's justification for the Cropper's dismissal stems from declining student enrollment and shrinking revenues. No matter the extent of Cropper's involvement in the religious life of Saint Augustine; adjudicating her damages claim for breach of her employment contract does not require the secular court's "wading into doctrinal waters"; it is simply the termination of the lay administrator at a parochial school. Even if Cropper had been a prominent actor in the religious life of the community, unless Saint Augustine- fired her for reasons associated with the application of church doctrine or governance, the ecclesiastical-abstention doctrine would not apply.

In the case, the school had specifically disclaimed reliance on the ministerial exception defense.