Religion Clause

Monday, September 17, 2018

Sunday, September 16, 2018

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Ackerman v. Washington, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151742 (ED MI, Sept. 6, 2018), a Michigan federal district court reinstated Orthodox Jewish inmates claim that providing a vegan diet instead of a kosher diet imposes a substantial burden on the sincere religious beliefs that plaintiffs must eat meat on the Sabbath and Jewish holidays and dairy on Shavuot.

In Luther v. White, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151896 (W KY, Sept. 6, 2018), a Kentucky federal district court allowed a Rastafarian inmate to supplement his prior complaint by adding a claim that he was denied the right to purchase and use incense.

In Ritter v. Davis, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152028 (ND OH, Sept. 6, 2018), an Ohio federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152036, Aug. 20, 2018) and refused to dismiss a Jewish inmate's complaint that his request for kosher meals was denied.

In Pleasant-Bey v. Luttrell, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152864 (WD TN, Sept. 7, 2018), a Tennessee federal district court dismissed a Muslim inmate's challenges to the prison's limitations on Jumu'ah services, food service policies regarding Ramadan, and its policies regarding the hiring of an imam.

In Soriano v. Spearman, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153187 (ED CA, Sept. 6, 2018), a California federal magistrate judge recommended allowing a Muslim inmate to move ahead with his complaint that Muslim inmates, unlike others, were not allowed to perform their prayers in the chapel, requiring them to pray outside in extreme weather conditions.

In Harvey v. Baker, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153802 (WD VA, Sept. 10, 2018), a Virginia federal district court allowed an inmate to move ahead with his free exercise claim for damages for denial of a pork-free diet that conformed to his Sunni Muslim beliefs.

In Burroughs v. Mitchell, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153808 (ND NY, Sept. 6, 2018), a New York federal district court, sorting through a wide-ranging complaint, dismissed an inmate's complaint that on one occasion defendants refused to provide a Koran, prayer rug, Kufi, and Ramadan meal, but allowed him to move ahead with his claim that one defendant refused to provide him with his religious items in retaliation for his refusal to respond to questions about two other inmates' escape.

In Dent v. Dennison, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153950 (SD IL, Sept.10, 2018), an Illinois federal district court rejected a magistrate's recommendation (2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153946, July 13, 2018) and refused to require prison authorities to allow an inmate to attend both Catholic and Protestant religious services.

Appeals Court Remands Employment Discrimination Claim Against NJ Corrections Department

In Roseus v. State of New Jersey, (NJ App., Sept. 10, 2018), a New Jersey state appeals court remanded to the trial court a suit in which plaintiff claimed the Department of Corrections (DOC) violated the state's Law Against Discrimination when it dismissed him from a training program for corrections officers. DOC refused to grant Marven Roseus, who for religious reasons does not shave his face or head, a religious accommodation to depart from the Department's grooming rules. The appeals court held:

[D]efendants moved for dismissal... Consequently, there is no record.... [W]e do not have a record of the DOC's actual grooming policy, the rationale for that policy, whether the DOC has granted accommodations to others from its grooming policy, whether the DOC engaged in a "bona fide effort" to accommodate plaintiff, and whether an accommodation to plaintiff would impose an "undue hardship" on the DOC.

Saturday, September 15, 2018

Muslim Inmate Wins $25,000 Damages Against Correctional Officer

In an unusual success for a prisoner case, a Nevada judge has awarded $15,000 in compensatory damages and $10,000 in punitive damages against a prison correctional officer in a suit by a Muslim inmate. In Howard v. Foster, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151629 (D NV, Sept. 6, 2018), the court described the correctional officer's conduct:

On the morning of August 19, 2012, somewhere between 40 and 60 Muslim inmates were holding Eid prayer services in the SDCC gymnasium.... The room was quiet enough for the individual leading the prayer to be heard by the other prayer participants.

During the prayer service, however, [correctional officer] Dicus began talking loudly enough for Howard and other prayer participants to hear. At first, Dicus asked the other officers why the inmates were in the gymnasium for prayer services. Then, Dicus began cursing and disparaging Muslims.... Dicus stated that he hoped Muslims would die....

Howard heard Diggle warn Dicus that the Muslim inmates would file grievances regarding his statements. Dicus responded, "Mother fucker grievance. . . . . I kill[ ] Muslims, you know. . . . They need to get their ass up out of here. What the hell we allowing them to be down there doing whatever they doing?"...

Dicus' outburst began very early on in the Eid prayer service and made the service unbearable to the participants. Because Dicus' comments were so disruptive, the Muslim inmates were not able to complete the Eid prayer service, and they did not have the Eid feast that they had planned to share in after prayer.

Court Refuses To Dismiss Challenge To Michigan's Protection of Catholic Adoption Agencies

In an important decision, a Michigan federal district court in Dumont v. Lyon, (ED MI, Sept. 14, 2018), held that same-sex couples can move ahead with their Establishment Clause and equal protection claims against the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services for permitting child placing agencies that contract with the state and receive state funds to use religious criteria to refuse to place children with same-sex couples. Laws enacted by the Michigan legislature in 2015 protect child-placing agencies from being required to provide adoption or foster care placements that conflict with their sincerely held religious beliefs, or being penalized for doing so. (See prior posting.)

In a 93-page opinion, the court first concludes that plaintiffs have Article III (but not taxpayer) standing to bring their challenges. Then, denying defendants' motion to dismiss, the court says in part:

Plaintiffs plausibly allege ... that the State’s practice of contracting with and permitting faith-based child placing agencies to turn away same-sex couples has both the subjective purpose of discriminating against those who oppose the view of the faith-based agencies ... and objectively endorses the religious view of those agencies that same-sex marriage is wrong, sending a “‘message [to Plaintiffs] that they are outsiders, not full members of the community.’”....

The child placing agencies are, in many ways, the gateway for a family seeking to adopt or foster a child into Michigan’s adoption and foster care system. The scope of their duties, and hence any “government exclusivity” of the functions they perform, must be the subject of further discovery. For purposes of analyzing Plaintiffs’ Establishment Clause claim, the Court must accept the allegations of the Complaint as true and such allegations surely “implicate” the Establishment Clause and plausibly suggest “excessive entanglement” such that the Court will allow Plaintiffs’ Establishment Clause claim to proceed further....

Plaintiffs are entitled to an opportunity to conduct discovery to support their claim that the State’s practice of continuing to contract with faith-based agencies that invoke PA53’s religious belief protection to turn away same-sex couples lacks a rational basis and to further develop their Equal Protection claim.

ACLU issued a press release announcing the decision.

Friday, September 14, 2018

Sikhs Ask DOE For Title VI Coverage

According to Huff Post, United Sikhs has asked the U.S. Department of Education to treat Sikhs as an ethnic group as well as a religion so that discrimination against Sikhs would fall under Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. That provision bars racial, but not religious, discrimination by educational institutions. As previously reported, the Department of Education has decided to reopen a case charging Rutgers University with allowing a hostile environment for Jewish students, defining Jews as an ethnic group.

Alaska Christian Women's Shelter Challenges Requirement It Serve Transgender Women

In Anchorage, Alaska, a Christian soup kitchen and women's shelter-- the Hope Center-- has filed a federal lawsuit against the Anchorage Equal Rights Commission seeking to end the Commission's investigation of the Center. According to KTTU News, The controversy grows out of the Hope Center's denial of shelter services to a transgender woman and her filing of a discrimination complaint. The suit seeks to end the Commission's investigation of the Center for violation of the city's anti-discrimination law that protects against discrimination on the basis of gender identity. The Center's complaint alleges in part:

It would not only be dangerous and against common sense, but would violate the Hope Center’s sincerely held religious beliefs to admit biological men into its shelter and allow them to sleep side by side and disrobe next to women, some of whom have been assaulted by men and fear for their safety.

Russian Law Enforcement Targets Jehovah's Witnesses

According to a Forum 18 report yesterday, in Russia since January of this year law enforcement agencies have been raiding the homes of Jehovah's Witnesses, charging many with violating the country's ban on extremist organizations. So far some 69 individuals are under investigation or on trial. Most of the cases follow on the 2017 ban on all activities of the Jehovah's Witness Administrative Center and its local affiliates.

Thursday, September 13, 2018

Teacher Lacks Standing To Challenge Contraceptive Mandate Exemptions

In Campbell v. Trump, (D CO, Sept. 11, 2018), a Colorado federal district court held that a teacher in a private school lacks standing to challenge the Trump administration rules that allow employers to refuse on religious or moral grounds to provide health insurance coverage for contraceptive services. Plaintiff currently has coverage in her employer's policy but argues that she fears her employer might withdraw coverage. The court held:

There are no factual allegations in the complaint that support an inference that injury to plaintiff, economic or otherwise, is “actual and imminent” as required to constitute an injury in fact under Article III standing principles.

Israeli Court Orders Recognition of Conversion Performed Outside of Official Rabbinate

Haaretz and Times of Israel report today that in a first of its kind decision in Israel, a Jerusalem district court has ordered Israel's Interior Ministry to register as Jewish in the Population Registry a woman converted by a rabbinical court operating outside of the official Rabbinate. The conversion was performed by Orthodox rabbis through Giyur K’Halakha, a private initiative of prominent religious Zionist rabbis that is less stringent in its conversion requirements.

Suit Charges Catholic Church With Defamation

The Morning Call yesterday reported on a lawsuit filed in a Pennsylvania state trial court by Juliann Bortz based on information which she learned for the first time from the recently released Pennsylvania state grand jury report on sexual abuse by Catholic clergy. The lawsuit, alleging defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress, claims that Church officials gathered “irrelevant, unrelated [or] false ‘dirt’ ” on Bortz to discredit her reports of abuse by a priest.

Wednesday, September 12, 2018

DOE Reopens Case Against Rutgers For Allowing Anti-Semitism On Campus

The New York Times reported yesterday:

The new head of civil rights at the Education Department has reopened a seven-year-old case brought by a Zionist group against Rutgers University, saying the Obama administration, in closing the case, ignored evidence that suggested the school allowed a hostile environment for Jewish students.

The move by Kenneth L. Marcus, the assistant secretary of education for civil rights and a longtime opponent of Palestinian rights causes, signaled a significant policy shift on civil rights enforcement — and injected federal authority in the contentious fights over Israel that have divided campuses across the country. It also put the weight of the federal government behind a definition of anti-Semitism that targets opponents of Zionism, and it explicitly defines Judaism as not only a religion but also an ethnic origin.

Ball State Settles Suit By Pro-Life Student Group

The Muncie Star Press reported last week on the recent settlement of a lawsuit (see prior posting) against Ball State University by "Students for Life at BSU." The suit alleged viewpoint discrimination in distribution of student activity fees. The pro-life student group's request for $300 from student activity fees was denied, apparently under the Guideline excluding from funding "[a]ny Organization which engages in activities, advocacy, or speech in order to advance a particular political interest, religion, religious faith, or ideology." Under the Settlement Agreement (full text), the University will adopt new rules that require that student activity fees be allocated in a viewpoint-neutral manner The school will also pay $300 in damages to the student group and pay the group's $12,000 in attorneys' fees to Alliance Defending Freedom.

Religious Themed Ad Reinstated On Football Field Amid Broader Litigation

As previously reported, in February four parents sued the Bossier Parish, Louisiana school board alleging widespread Establishment Clause violations. Recently, amidst settlement talks in the litigation, the Benton High School Booster Club sold advertising space on the school's football field to Christ Fit Gym. The business' logo that was placed on the field in the end zone includes a cross and a citation to a bible verse. KTBS News and KTAL report that at the recommendation of legal counsel the ad was removed just before the school's homecoming game on Friday, pending consultation with the court. But apparently Christ Fit Gym filed suit in state court against the Booster Club challenging removal of the ad, and a temporary restraining order was issued against the Club. The Booster Club is not a defendant in the federal lawsuit. The School Board that is a party to the federal lawsuit was not previously aware of the logo, but met yesterday to discuss it. As reported by Bossier Now, amid increasing pressure the Board, after a two hour executive session, decided to fight the federal lawsuit rather than settle it and to allow back Christ Fit Gym's ad.

RLUIPA Challenge By Catholic High School To Stadium Lighting Rules Rejected

In Marianist Province of the United States v. City of Kirkwood, (ED MO, Sept. 7, 2018), a Missouri federal district court rejected a RLUIPA challenge to a Missouri city's zoning regulation of pole mounted lights in outdoor sports fields. The challenge was brought by Vianney High School, a Catholic Marianist institution. The court held in part:

Vianney has not demonstrated that its ability to use the lights and sound system constitute a "religious exercise" or that its inability to use the lights and sound system constitutes a "substantial burden" on its religious beliefs.

The court also rejected the school's RLUIPA "equal terms" claim and various state law challenges.

Sunday, September 09, 2018

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Young v. Hooks, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 25324 (6th Cir., Sept. 5, 2018), the 6th Circuit upheld the dismissal of an inmate's complaint that a correctional officer poured out his prayer oil.

In Whitehead v. Honeycutt, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149705 (WD NC, Aug. 27, 2018), a North Carolina federal district court allowed a pre-trial detainee to move ahead with his complaint that his Bible and other Seventh Day Adventist religious books were confiscated.

In Ali v. Romero, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149848 (D MD, Sept. 4, 2018), a Maryland federal district court appointed counsel to file an amended complaint naming correct defendants in a suit by an inmate who objects to the failure of a facility to offer daily Muslim religious services.

In Blankenship v. Terry, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149863 (SD WV, Sept. 4, 2018), a West Virginia federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150125, Aug. 7, 2018) and dismissed an inmate's complaint that a corrections officer threw his prayer mat on the floor and stepped on it, and that plaintiff was refused a new prayer mat.

In Johnson v. Bienkoski, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150688 (MD PA, Aug. 31, 2018), a Pennsylvania federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing an inmate's complaint that alleged, among other things, that his religious beads were confiscated and that he had his commissary privileges restricted during Ramadan.

In Ackerman v. Washington, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150721 (ED MI, Sept. 5, 2018), a Michigan federal district court denied summary judgment for the Michigan Department of Corrections in a suit by Jewish inmates who claim that the kosher meals being provided are not adequately protected against cross-contamination that would make them non-kosher.

In Gill v. Aramark Correctional Services, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150895 (ED WI, Sept. 5, 2018), a Wisconsin federal district court allowed a Muslim inmate to move ahead with his complaint that on most days he was served vegan meals instead of Halal meals.

In Trainauskas v. Fralicker, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151161 (SD IL, Sept.5, 2018), an Illinois federal district court adopted in part a magistrate's recommendation (2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151160, June 18, 2018) and allowed an inmate who is a follower of Asatru to move ahead with his complaint about disciplinary sanctions growing out of his involvement with Asatru organizations.

Trump Holds Pre-Rosh Hashanah Conference Call With Rabbis

Rosh Hashanah begins this evening. The White House has posted a transcript of President Trump's annual conference call with Jewish faith leaders and rabbis held on Thursday. The President said in part:

I send my warmest wishes to the Jewish people in the United States and around the world as we approach the High Holy Days. The Jewish practice of reflection, atonement, and remembrance during this holy period not only strengthens Jewish communities, but inspires all Americans.

The Forward reports:

President Trump’s annual pre-Rosh Hashanah phone call to Jewish groups on Thursday lasted only 20 minutes but featured four allies singing his praises to an audience far more right-wing than calls under past administrations.

UPDATE: The President and First Lady also, in a Sept. 9 press release, sent greetings to those celebrating Rosh Hashanah.

Saturday, September 08, 2018

Challenges To Pension Plan's ERISA Exemption Move On

Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of three large health care systems whose employees had challenged whether their retirement plans qualified as exempt "church pans" under ERISA. (See prior posting.) Now in one of the cases on remand, a California federal district court has refused to dismiss further challenges to the pension plan's exemption. In Rollins v. Dignity Health, (ND CA, Sept. 6, 2018), the court held that plaintiffs can move ahead with their claims that the plan is not properly "maintained" as a church plan and that it is not associated with a church. The court also refused to dismiss state breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty claims. The court held that it will reach plaintiffs' Establishment Clause challenge to the church plan exemption only if it concludes that the plan qualifies as a church plan. If the plan's exemption is not ultimately upheld, the plan may be underfunded by as much as $1.2 billion. (See prior posting.)

11th Circuit Affirms Order To Remove Cross From Park, But Expresses Disagreement With Precedent

In Kondrat'Yev v. City of Pensacola, (11th Cir., Sept. 7, 2018), a 3-judge panel of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, feeling bound by prior 11th Circuit and Supreme Court precedent, affirmed a Florida district court's Establishment Clause decision ordering Pensacola to remove a 34-foot Latin cross from a public park. Two judges each wrote lengthy concurring opinions explaining their disagreement with existing precedent. One of those judges, District Judge C. Ashley Royal sitting by designation on the case, wrote a 53-page concurrence that includes a long history of religious establishments. Here is an excerpt from Judge Royal's interesting opinion:

[T]he history of the idea of the religious conscience was central to the history of religious freedom in early America and in Europe. But religious conscience was not understood as separate from religious action. It was not simply some psychological phenomenon or something that you had on your mind. Protestants and Catholics did not fight the Wars of Religion for almost 100 years because some religious image made them feel uncomfortable, unwelcome, or uneasy. Furthermore, in the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries, men and women were not burned at the stake, beheaded, hung, flogged, banished, jailed, beaten, taxed, had their ears cropped, or were divested of their property or their rights as citizens because of their state of mind. It was because of their actions and because their actions arose out of their religious convictions. To counter dissidents’ religious actions, churches and governments imposed penalties, and that is what the Establishment Clause was designed to protect against.

You can listen to this march of horrors, abuse, cruelty, and death and recognize that it was not a walk in the park. And despite the fact that I am careful to avoid trite statements in my orders, all this case is about is a walk in the park.... Some courts have lost sight of why so many fought for so long at such great cost for religious freedom. It was not to protect people from looking at crosses in public parks. That demeans and debases the sacrifices of millions of people....

3rd Circuit Hears Arguments On Cross In County Seal

Yesterday, the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments (audio of full arguments) in Freedom From Religion Foundation v. County of Lehigh. In the case, a Pennsylvania federal district court reluctantly held that a large, central Latin cross in the seal and flag of Lehigh County, Pennsylvania violate the Establishment Clause under the Lemon test and the endorsement test. Daily Journal reports on the oral arguments.

Friday, September 07, 2018

Group Lacks Standing To Challenge Charter School Act On Establishment Clause Grounds

In Indiana Coalition for Public Education v. McCormick, (SD IN, Sept. 6, 2018), an Indiana federal district court dismissed on standing grounds a suit by an advocacy organization challenging on Establishment Clause grounds Indiana's Charter School Act. Plaintiff claims that it is unconstitutional for the state to allow a religious college to be an authorizer for public charter schools. The court said in part:

The Coalition’s Complaint is really a challenge to Indiana’s policies of school choice and of school funding following the student, draped in the clothing of an Establishment Clause challenge. But the Coalition challenges just one recipient of that funding, and it all but admits that its alleged injuries are in no meaningful way caused by the religious character of Seven Oaks’ authorizer. Rather, it is a mere coincidence that Seven Oaks, with which the public school corporations must compete for students, happens to be authorized by a religious institution. The school corporations would face exactly the same funding difficulties (and thus the Coalition would face the same alleged injury) had Seven Oaks been authorized by a secular private college, as permitted by the Charter School Act, instead of Grace College. These observations confirm the gross misfit between the alleged constitutional injury and the Coalition’s requested relief.

New York State Moves On Clergy Sex Abuse

Washington Post yesterday reported:

The New York attorney general’s office has issued subpoenas to every Catholic diocese in the state, becoming the latest U.S. state to embark on an expansive investigation of sex crimes committed and covered up by Catholic priests....

After New York’s subpoenas were issued, and first reported by the Associated Press on Thursday, New Jersey quickly followed, announcing a criminal task force focused on investigating sexual abuse by Catholic clergy. New Mexico launched an investigation this week, and Nebraska and Missouri have inquiries underway.

New York's attorney general yesterday also announced the creation of a clergy abuse hotline and an online complaint form. All of this activity follows on a much publicized Pennsylvania grand jury report on clergy sex abuse. (See prior posting.)

Thursday, September 06, 2018

India's Supreme Court Legalizes Consensual Homosexual Relations

In four separate opinions spanning 493 pages, India's Supreme Court yesterday struck down Section 377 of the India Penal Code insofar as it bans consensual homosexual relationships. In Johar v. Union of India, (India Sup. Ct., Sept. 6, 2018), Justice Misra wrote:

Consensual carnal intercourse among adults, be it homosexual or heterosexual, in private space, does not in any way harm the public decency or morality. Therefore, Section 377 IPC in its present form violates Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

CNN reports on the decision.

Dramatic Slowdown In Approval of Refugee Status For Iranian Christians

Yesterday's Los Angeles Times reports on the massive slowdown in U.S. approvals of refugee status for Iranian Christians and other Iranian religious minorities (such as Mandaeans) who are applying under the Lautenberg-Specter program. The slowdown began in late 2016. In the first quarter of fiscal 2018, only 29 Iranians were admitted under the program, compared to 1,061 in the first quarter of 2017. Under the program, refugees with a U.S. sponsor travel to Vienna where they typically have encountered only a 3 to 6 month wait. the State Department says the slowdown stems from enhanced security check procedures apparently instituted under the Obama administration. In July in Doe v. Nielsen, (ND CA, July 10, 2018), a California federal district court ordered the Department of Homeland Security to provide the reasons for denial of their applications to 87 Iranian refugees in Austria.

Amish Couple Sue Seeking Exemption From Photo Requirement To Get Permanent U.S. Residency

AP reports that an Old Order Amish couple filed suit yesterday in an Indiana federal district court challenging the federal government's refusal to grant permanent residency to the wife--a Canadian-- unless the husband and wife furnish photos of themselves. The couple has refused because of their religious belief that photos are graven images prohibited by the Second Commandment. The couple wed in 2014 after the husband's first wife died. They live with their 13 children in an Amish farming community in southern Indiana. They claim that the government's refusal to accommodate their religious beliefs violate their 1st and 5th Amendment rights. [Thanks to Tom Rutledge for the lead.]

3rd Circuit Will Not Adjudicate Pastor's Breach of Contract Claim

In Lee v. Sixth Mount Zion Baptist Church of Pittsburgh, (3d Cir., Sept. 5, 2018), the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals refused to adjudicate a terminated minister's breach of employment contract claim, saying in part:

The Church argues that Lee materially breached the Agreement by failing to provide adequate spiritual leadership, as reflected in decreased church contributions and attendance during Lee’s tenure....

While the amount of church contributions and members is a matter of arithmetic, assessing Lee’s role, if any, in causing decreased giving and reduced membership in the Church requires a determination of what constitutes adequate spiritual leadership and how that translates into donations and attendance—questions that would impermissibly entangle the court in religious governance and doctrine prohibited by the Establishment Clause....

Moreover, parsing the precise reasons for Lee’s termination is akin to determining whether a church’s proffered religious-based reason for discharging a church leader is mere pretext, an inquiry the Supreme Court has explicitly said is forbidden by the First Amendment’s ministerial exception. Hosanna-Tabor....

Becket Fund issued a press release announcing the decision. Pittsburgh Post Gazette reports on the decision.

Wednesday, September 05, 2018

Senate Passes Act Protecting Religiously Affiliated Community Centers

The U.S. Senate yesterday passed by unanimous consent S. 994: Protecting Religiously Affiliated Institutions Act of 2018 (full text). The bill expands the definition of "religious real property" in 18 USC Sec. 247 to include real property owned or leased by a nonprofit, religiously affiliated organization, such as religiously affiliated community centers. It also expands the kind of damage, destruction or threats to religious real property that are prohibited to include obstructing a person's free exercise of religious beliefs by threats of force against religious real property. This is intended to cover bomb threats to religiously affiliated organizations such as the wave of bomb threats in 2017 directed at Jewish Community Centers. The bill also increases punishment in certain cases. The bill now goes to the House of Representatives which has already passed HR 1730 which is virtually identical to S. 994. AJC issued a press release applauding the Senate's action.

Parents Charged In Death of Son From Forced Religious Fast

In Wisconsin, the parents of two boys were charged with neglect causing the death of one son and great bodily harm to the other resulting from a religious fast that lasted a month and a half. Wisconsin State Journal reports that the parents who immigrated from Nigeria 12 years ago locked their 15 and 11 year old sons in the house and allowed them only water while they were waiting for a blessing from God. The 15-year old died last Friday, the day which, according to the father, the fast was to end.

Spanish Case Charges Actor's Facebook Post Violated Blasphemy Law

El Pais yesterday reported on a high profile battle in Spain over a prosecution under the country's blasphemy law:

A Madrid court has issued an arrest warrant for Spanish actor and activist Willy Toledo after he twice failed to show up in court, where he had been summonsed after a lawyers’ association accused him of offending religious sentiments.

The Spanish Association of Christian Lawyers filed a complaint with the public prosecutor after Toledo published a post on Facebook in 2017, in which he expressed his indignation over a court probe into three women in Seville who, in 2014, paraded a large model of a vagina through the city streets, in an imitation of a religious procession, dubbing it the “coño insumiso,” or “Insubordinate pussy.”

Homeless People May Not Be Prosecuted For Sleeping Outdoors When Only Option Is Religious Shelter

In Martin v. City of Boise, (9th Cir., Sept. 4, 2018), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals held that the ban on cruel and unusual punishment in the 8th Amendment bars a city from criminalizing sleeping outdoors on public property when homeless people have no option to sleep indoors, including where their access to a shelter is conditioned on their participating in religious programs. Two of the city's three shelters are run by Christian organizations. The court concluded that

River of Life permits individuals to remain at the shelter after 17 days in the Emergency Services Program only on the condition that they become part of the New Life Discipleship program, which has a mandatory religious focus.... There are also facts in dispute concerning whether the Emergency Services Program itself has a religious component.... A city cannot, via the threat of prosecution, coerce an individual to attend religion-based treatment programs consistently with the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.... Yet at the conclusion of a 17-day stay at River of Life, or a 30-day stay at City Light, an individual may be forced to choose between sleeping outside on nights when Sanctuary is full (and risking arrest under the ordinances), or enrolling in BRM programming that is antithetical to his or her religious beliefs.

AP reports on the decision.

Tuesday, September 04, 2018

Monday, September 03, 2018

Scottish Appeals Court Says Government Did Not Adequately Consider Refugees' Claim of Conversion To Christianity

In TF and MA v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, (Scot. Ct. Sess., Aug. 30, 2018), Scotland's Inner House, Court of Session, held that the Secretary of State and appellate tribunals had failed to adequately consider certain evidence that Iranian asylum seekers had genuinely converted to Christianity after leaving Iran. All the parties agreed that individuals who converted from Islam to Christianity face a risk of persecution of forced to return to Iran. At issue however was:

the status of evidence from church leaders (or others holding positions of responsibility within a church) about the conduct of a person who has begun the process of admission into the church and as to the sincerity of his conversion to Christianity; as to the weight to be given to such evidence; and whether the usefulness of such evidence as a guide to the genuineness of the sur place conversion is undermined by findings that, in relation to other matters, the appellant, the applicant for asylum, has given evidence which is untrue or unreliable and/or may be said to undermine his basic credibility.

Law & Religion UK has more on the decision.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Streater v. Allen, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145087 (ED TX, Aug. 24, 2018), a Texas federal district court dismissed an inmate's complaint that during a two-week lock down he was unable to attend religious services and was denied hot meals for at least a week.

In Ramos v. Malloy, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145147 (D CT, Aug. 27, 2018), a Connecticut federal district court dismissed, with leave to file an amended complaint, an inmate's lawsuit claiming he did not receive a book about religion, even though copies were mailed to him twice.

In Cordero v. Kelley, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145804 (D NJ, Aug. 22, 2018), a New Jersey federal district court allowed an inmate to move ahead with claims that religious tracts he purchased to give his family and friends were confiscated.

In Buie v. Mitchell, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146159 (ED WI, Aug. 28, 2018), a Wisconsin federal district court dismissed an inmate's lawsuit that complained about the manner of preparation of certain kosher meals.

In Guilliot v. Harmon, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145095 (ND TX, Aug. 27, 2018), Texas federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146273, July 25, 2018) and permitted a Wiccan inmate who was serving a sentence for receiving child pornography to move ahead with his claim that his rights under RFRA were violated when he was denied access to a Rider-Waite Tarot deck — a tarot deck that includes artistic depictions of non-sexualized nudity.

In Galvan v. Sterrett, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146339 (SD IL, Aug. 28, 2018), an Illinois federal district court allowed a Catholic inmate to move ahead with his complaint that his permission to attend Protestant religious services as well as Catholic ones was revoked.

In Gaston v. Marean, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146578 (ED CA, Aug. 28, 2018), a California federal district court held that a Ratafarian inmate's additional assertions regarding the impact of cutting off his dreadlocks would allege a substantial burden on religious exercise, contrary to a magistrate's original conclusion (see prior posting). Thus the court provided the opportunity to file an amended complaint.

In Loufer v. Carr, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147006 (D KA, Aug. 29, 2018), a Kansas federal district court gave an inmate 30 days to show why his sketchy complaint regarding a religious diet should not be dismissed.

In Masek v. Chastain, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148013 (ED MO, Aug. 30, 2018), a Missouri federal district court dismissed a complaint by plaintiff, who is civilly detained after being found not guilty by reason of insanity for the murder of his father, that he was deprived of a copy of the Bible for one week.

In Wright v. Lassiter, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148188 (WD NC, Aug. 30, 2018), a North Carolina federal district court allowed a Rastafarian inmate to move ahead with claims of confiscation of religious books and items, and forced removal from a vegan diet.

In Helm v. Allen, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149080 (WD KY, Aug. 30, 2018), a Kentucky federal district court allowed an inmate to move ahead with his complaint that he was denied a Catholic Bible and mail from the Dtnamic Catholic Institute.

Sunday, September 02, 2018

Court Rejects Claim That Church Board Improperly Appointed Interim Pastor

In Leggett v. Moore, 2018 IL App (1st) 171101-U (IL App., Aug. 28, 2018), an Illinois appellate court held that the First Amendment does not prevent a court from deciding whether a church has violated it own bylaws when that does not raise issues of church doctrine. Plaintiffs alleged that True Zion church formed a new board of directors without complying with church bylaws, and improperly selected a new interim pastor. They contend that the church overseer was the person entitled to appoint an interim pastor, even though there is no mention of this in the bylaws. The court dismissed their claim, holding that "the duly elected board of directors affirmed the church bylaws and ratified the actions of the interim pastor during meetings at which plaintiffs attended but abstained from voting...."

7 Indicted For Fraud In Payments for Internet Equipment For Yeshivas

Last Wednesday, the U.S.. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York announced the indictment (full text) of seven individuals on wire fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud charges growing out of federal payments intended to fund computer equipment for Orthodox Jewish yeshivas. The indictment charges that for many years, defendants billed the federal E-Rate program for millions of dollars in equipment that was not furnished, or was furnished at inflated prices and often was not needed. The federal program is intended to provide schools and libraries serving economically disadvantaged children with internet access. According to a Forward report on the indictment: "Some of the internet services paid for by E-Rate had been requested by schools that ban internet use for religious reasons."

Friday, August 31, 2018

Street Preacher's Disturbing-the-Peace Citation Was Valid

In Roy v. City of Monroe, (WD LA, Aug. 29, 2018), a Louisiana federal district court dismissed a street preacher's suit challenging the constitutionality of the city of Monroe's disturbing-the-peace ordinance and the citation he received for violating it. The court described the conduct that led to the citation and summons:

The Corner Bar is known as a gathering spot for homosexuals. Roy believes that homosexuality is a sin. He preaches against homosexuality, as well as drinking alcohol, the use of drugs, fornication, and other topics.... On this night, they gathered at a telephone pole across the street from the Corner Bar. Roy was wearing an orange jump suit to demonstrate that he is a “prisoner of Christ” and to pose the questions to others, “Whose prisoner are you?”. At various times, he was also carrying a sixfoot cross made of cedar 4 x 4s. He normally approaches people and says something short to “startle” them or “stop” them. He cannot “afford to” be concerned about other people’s feelings because it might alter his message. Roy tells people that they are “going to Hell,” uses the terms “homosexual” and “whore,” and will tell people that “their father is the devil.” He raises his voice, shouts, and uses “strong Biblical language” to convey his message.

RLUIPA Challenges To Zoning Decision On Catholic Church Must Go To Trial

In Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Kansas City in Kansas v. City of Mission Woods, (D KA, Aug. 30, 2018), a Kansas federal district court refused to grant summary judgement for either party on most of the RLUIPA claims by a Catholic church that sought to convert a single family house into a meeting house. The city of Mission Woods had denied zoning approval for the project.

Protestant Navy Chaplains Lose Discrimination Lawsuit

In In re Navy Chaplaincy, (D DC, Aug. 30, 2018), a D.C. federal district court granted summary judgment for the U.S..Navy in a long-running suit by non-liturgical Protestant Navy chaplains alleging discrimination against them. The court summarized the facts and its holding:

Plaintiffs’ primary claim is that, until 2002, the Navy maintained an unconstitutional policy of placing at least one Roman Catholic chaplain on every selection board, which resulted in Catholic chaplains being promoted at a disproportionately high rate compared to other religious groups. Plaintiffs also challenge a host of other allegedly unconstitutional selection-board policies and procedures—some of which, plaintiffs claim, continue to this day. Finally, plaintiffs challenge a statute that privileges selection-board deliberations from disclosure in litigation, arguing that it is unconstitutional as applied to their case because it denies them access to information that they need to prove their constitutional claims. To redress these wrongs, plaintiffs—each of whom was either passed over for promotion or selected for early retirement by a board that was allegedly tainted by one or more of the challenged procedures—seek an order directing the Navy to reinstate them to active duty, if necessary, and to convene new, properly constituted selection boards to reconsider the personnel actions taken against them....

To a considerable extent, the result in this case is dictated by prior rulings.... Consequently, there is little left to do here but to apply those standards ... which, as explained below, does not even come close to showing the degree of discrimination required for plaintiffs’ challenges to succeed. Likewise, this Court has already twice considered and twice rejected plaintiffs’ constitutional challenge to the statutory privilege for selection-board proceedings...

Supreme Court Refuses Emergency Injunction In Catholic Social Services Foster Care Case

In a one-sentence order yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to grant an emergency injunction in Fulton v. Philadelphia. In the case, a Pennsylvania federal district court rejected Catholic Social Services challenges to Philadelphia' requirement that it not discriminate against same-sex couples in foster care placement. Catholic Social Services wanted the Supreme Court to allow it to continue foster care placements while it appealed the city's intake freeze to the 3rd Circuit. Justices Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch would have granted the injunction. SCOTUSblog reports on the court's action

Thursday, August 30, 2018

Excluding Non-Theists As Legislative Guest Chaplains Violates Establishment Clause

In Fields v. Speaker of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, (MD PA, Aug. 29, 2018), a Pennsylvania federal district court held that the guest chaplain policy of Pennsylvania's House of Representatives violates the Establishment Clause. The legislative chamber's policy allows invocations to be given only by individuals who adhere to, or are members of a religious organization that subscribes to, a belief in “God” or a “divine” or “higher” power. The House Speaker and Parliamentarian refused to permit a non-theist to serve as a guest chaplain to deliver an invocation. The court said in part:

That history has tolerated the natural prevalence of theistic legislative prayer is hardly evidence that the Framers would abide deliberate and categorical exclusion of nontheists. Accordingly, the House’s prayer practice finds no refuge in history and tradition....

In light of this nation’s vastly diverse religious tapestry, there is no justification to sanction government’s establishment of a category of favored religions—like monotheistic or theistic faiths—through legislative prayer.

The court also held:

The House’s pre-2017 opening invocation practice, which coerces visitors to stand during the opening prayer and thereby participate in a religious exercise, likewise offends the Establishment Clause.

Americans United issued a press release announcing the decision.

Court Will Not Order Group's Christian Flag Displayed On City Flag Pole

In Shurtleff v. City of Boston, (D MA, Aug. 29, 2018), a Massachusetts federal district court refused to grant a preliminary injunction against the city's policy of refusing to fly non-secular flags from City Hall flagpoles. Plaintiffs sought to fly a "Christian flag” from the city's pole in conjunction with a Constitution Day and Citizenship Day event. Rejecting plaintiffs' free speech argument, the court said in part:

If the flags are government speech, as Defendants assert, “then the Free Speech Clause has no application” and the City may “select the views that it wants to express.” ... In contrast, if the flags are private speech displayed in a limited public forum, as Plaintiffs argue, the restriction on non-secular flags must be reasonable and viewpoint neutral.... This Court concludes that the selection and display of the flags on the City flagpole constitute government speech. Moreover, even if they did not constitute government speech, the Court finds that the City’s restriction on non-secular flags satisfies the constitutional requirements for limitations on speech in a limited public forum....

The City’s policy is ... reasonable based on the City’s interest in avoiding the appearance of endorsing a particular religion and a consequential violation of the Establishment Clause.... Moreover, ... [in suggesting] the opportunity to conduct their event on City Hall Plaza, fly a secular flag on the City flagpole or display the Christian flag on City Hall Plaza but not on the City flagpole, the City has demonstrated reasonableness and that it does not seek to silence Plaintiffs.

The court also rejected Establishment Clause and Equal Protection challenges. Boston Globe reports on the decision.

Wednesday, August 29, 2018

UN Report Says Investigate Myanmar Generals for Genocide

On Monday, the United Nations Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar released a Report (full text) recommending that Myanmar’s top military generals must be investigated for genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes directed at the minority Rohingya people. CNN has more on the report.

Settlement Reached In D.C. Mikveh Voyeurism Case

As reported by yesterday's Washington Post, a $14.25 million settlement has been reached in the class action lawsuit growing out of the secret taping by Rabbi Barry Freundel of women using the mikveh (ritual bath) affiliated with Freundel's synagogue. The spying took place between 2005 and 2014. Under the settlement, which still must be approved by the court, each woman who was videotaped will receive at least $25,000. Other women who used the mikvah may receive $2.500. Defendants' insurance company will pay the settlement. Freundel was sentenced in 2015 to six and one-half years in prison.

Amicus Briefs Filed With SCOTUS In Case of Funeral Home's Firing of Transgender Employee

Several amicus briefs have been filed with the U.S. Supreme Court urging the Court to grant certiorari in R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. EEOC. Links to the briefs are available at SCOTUSblog. In the case, the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, rejecting the employer's religious freedom defense, held that a Michigan funeral home violated Title VII when it fired a transgender employee. (See prior posting.) Townhall has more on these developments.

8th Circuit: Satanic Temple Member Lacks Standing To Challenge Abortion Restrictions

In Satanic Temple v. Parson, (8th Cir., Aug. 28, 2018), the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal (see prior posting) of a challenge to Missouri's abortion restrictions. The court said in part:

Mary Doe is a member of The Satanic Temple and a resident of the state of Missouri. After becoming pregnant, she sought an abortion in St. Louis, Missouri. She complied with certain state-mandated procedures, which the complaint alleges constituted direct and unwelcome personal contact with religion, in violation of the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses. After receiving the abortion, she filed this lawsuit....

Here, Mary Doe was not pregnant at the date the action was initiated and seeks only prospective relief.... Mary Doe therefore lacks constitutional standing. Additionally, although “[p]regnancy provides a classic justification for a conclusion of nonmootness,” the doctrine does not apply here because she did not first establish standing.

Courthouse News Service reports on the decision.

8th Circuit Embraces Historical Practices Test In Upholding "In God We Trust" on Currency

In New Doe Child #1 v. United States, (8th Cir., Aug. 28, 2018), the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a constitutional challenge to the placement of the motto "In God We Trust" on U.S. coins and currency. While the result is consistent with that of numerous other circuits, the analysis set out by the majority opinion is of particular interest. Judge Gruender, writing for himself and Judge Beam, takes the position that the Supreme Court's decision in Town of
Greece v. Galloway signaled a "'major doctrinal shift' in Establishment Clause jurisprudence," explaining:

In Galloway, the Supreme Court offered an unequivocal directive: “[T]he Establishment Clause must be interpreted by reference to historical practices and understandings.”...[H]istorical practices often reveal what the Establishment Clause was originally understood to permit, while attention to coercion highlights what it has long been understood to prohibit....

... [H]istorical practices confirm that the Establishment Clause does not require courts to purge the Government of all religious reflection or to “evince a hostility to religion by disabling the government from in some ways recognizing our religious heritage.”....

Here, we recognize that convenience may lead some Plaintiffs to carry cash, but nothing compels them to assert their trust in God. Certainly no “reasonable observer” would think that the Government is attempting to force citizens to express trust in God with every monetary transaction.... Indeed, the core of the Plaintiffs’ argument is that they are continually confronted with “what they feel is an offensive religious message.” But Galloway makes clear that “[o]ffense . . . does not equate to coercion.”

Judge Kelly's concurring opinion argues that Galloway was merely a clarification of exiting Establishment Clause doctrine, not a sea change in it; but that exiting Supreme Court case law upholds the motto.

Judge Gruender, in portions of his opinion joined by all 3 judges on the panel, went on to reject plaintiffs' free speech, free exercise, RFRA and equal protection challenges. In considering plaintiffs' RFRA challenge, the court held that plaintiffs have failed to allege a "substantial burden" on their exercise of religion, saying in part:

Here, the complaint alleges that the cost of the Plaintiffs’ adherence to their religious convictions is “relinquishing the convenience of carrying the nation’s money.” While cash may be a convenient means of participating in the economy, there are many alternatives that would not violate the Plaintiffs’ stated beliefs....

We recognize that, in limited circumstances, there may not be a viable cash alternative. But the complaint does not allege that the Plaintiffs are unable to make necessary or even regular purchases, and we do not think that difficulty buying “a popsicle from the neighborhood ice cream truck” or using a coin-operated laundry machine is what the Supreme Court had in mind when it said that RFRA protects against the denial of “full participation in the economic life of the Nation.” See Hobby Lobby, 134 S. Ct. at 2775-76, 2779, 2783.

Becket Fund issued a press release announcing the decision. Reuters reports on the decision.

Tuesday, August 28, 2018

What Else Did President Trump Tell Evangelical Leaders?

As previously reported, yesterday President Trump spoke to evangelical leaders at a dinner in the State Dining Room of the White House. Subsequently the White House posted a transcript of the President's remarks. It appears to be a transcript of the remarks as delivered, not merely as prepared, since audience applause is noted a various points. However, CNN today reports on other quotations which it says were taken from a recording of the President's "closed-door remarks" in the State Dining Room. Apparently these preceded or followed the remarks posted by the White House. Here are the quotes as reported by CNN:

This November 6 election is very much a referendum on not only me, it's a referendum on your religion, it's a referendum on free speech and the First Amendment. It's a referendum on so much.

It's not a question of like or dislike, it's a question that they will overturn everything that we've done and they will do it quickly and violently. And violently. There is violence. When you look at Antifa -- these are violent people.

You have tremendous power. You were saying, in this room, you have people who preach to almost 200 million people. Depending on which Sunday we're talking about.

You have to hopefully get out and get people to support us. If you don't, that will be the beginning of ending everything that you've gotten. The polls might be good, but a lot of them say they are going to vote in 2020, but they're not going to vote if I'm not on a ballot. I think we're doing well, I think we're popular, but there's a real question as to whether people are going to vote if I'm not on the ballot. And I'm not on the ballot.

I just ask you to go out and make sure all of your people vote. Because if they don't -- it's November 6 -- if they don't vote, we're going to have a miserable two years and we're going to have, frankly, a very hard period of time. You're one election away from losing everything that you've gotten. Little thing: Merry Christmas, right? You couldn't say 'Merry Christmas.'

White House Dinner With Evangelicals

AP reports on a dinner at the White House last night with evangelical Christian leaders:

President Donald Trump says the government’s “attacks on communities of faith” are over as he hosts a dinner celebrating evangelical Christian leaders at the White House.

Trump says the government in recent years has tried to undermine religious freedom, but those days are over.

He’s pointing to efforts by his administration to secure the release of imprisoned pastors and limit federal funding for abortion providers.

UPDATE: Here is the full text of the President's remarks.

Suit Challenges Ban On On Town's Rental of Space For Worship Services

A suit was filed yesterday in a South Carolina federal district court against Edisto Beach challenging the Town's rule change that prohibits renting space in the town's Civic Center for religious worship services. The complaint (full text) in Redeemer Fellowship of Edisto Island v. Town of Edisto Beach, South Carolina, (D SC, filed 8/27/2018), contends that the ban violates the First and 14rh Amendments. ADF issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

Monday, August 27, 2018

Archbishop Calls For Pope's Resignation Over Cover-Up of Abuse

In a letter (full text) dated August 22, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, who served as apostolic nuncio in Washington D.C. from 2011 to 2016, has leveled charges against senior clerics and Pope Francis himself in the cover-up of sex abuse charges against Archbishop Theodore McCarrick. (See prior related posting.) As reported by the National Catholic Register:

In an extraordinary 11-page written testament, a former apostolic nuncio to the United States has accused several senior prelates of complicity in covering up Archbishop Theodore McCarrick’s allegations of sexual abuse, and has claimed that Pope Francis knew about sanctions imposed on then-Cardinal McCarrick by Pope Benedict XVI but chose to repeal them.

In the letter, Archbishop Vigano concludes:

Pope Francis must be the first to set a good example for cardinals and bishops who covered up McCarrick's abuses and resign along with all of them.

Burning In Effigy Does Not Violate Ban In India On Mock Funerals

In Jadaun v. State of Upper Pradesh, (Allahabad High Court, Aug. 9, 2018), a trial court in India held that the burning in effigy of a living person by protesters does not violate the statutory ban on participation in a mock funeral ceremony. LiveLaw reports on the decision.

Sunday, August 26, 2018

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Saif'ullah v. Cruzen, Smith v. Cruzen, and Smith v Albritton (9th Cir., Aug. 22, 2018), the 9th Circuit, in separate opinions, affirmed the dismissal of claims related to a prison's interruption of congregational prayer.

In Pevia v. Bishop, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139541 (D MD, Aug. 16, 2018), a Maryland federal district court dismissed a Native American inmate's complaint that while he was in maximum security he was not able to attend religious services.

In Blair v. Raemisch, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138796 (D CO, Aug. 16, 2018), a Colorado federal district court adopted in part a magistrate's recommendations (2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139806, July 26, 2018) and dismissed an inmate's complaint about the religious vegan diet that was being served.

In Anderson v. Russell, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141296 (ED WA, Aug. 20, 2018), a Washington federal district court dismissed a complaint by a Christian inmate whose requests to receive special Passover meals were denied.

In Jones v. Malin, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141892 (SD NY, Aug. 21, 2018), New York federal district court refused to grant summary judgment to defendants in an inmate's suit for monetary damages for Sing Sing's two month interruption in separate Shi'a Jumu'ah services.

In Tyler v. Ray, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142354 (D SC, Aug. 22, 2018) a South Carolina federal district court adopted a magistrate's report (2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142732, July 26, 2018) and dismissed a complaint by a Jehovah's Witness civil detainee that he was not permitted to take his Bible and literature with him from his cell to recreation, and that there were limits on his ability to meet with outside religious volunteers and to receive books. UPDATE: The court's amended order is at 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 155969, Sept. 12, 2018.

In Allen v. Echele, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143953 (ED MO, Aug. 23, 2018), a Missouri federal district court dismissed a pretrial detainee's complaint that he was denied a kosher diet.

Saturday, August 25, 2018

Irish State Funded Catholic Schools Can No Longer Admit With Religious Preferences

CNN today reports on the change in school admission policies in Ireland that take effect this school year. Some 90% of state-funded primary schools in Ireland are Catholic. In the past, they have given priority to children who have been baptized as Catholic. This has led some parents to have their children baptized only so they can be admitted into a high quality school. In July, the Irish parliament passed a law prohibiting this favoritism

Friday, August 24, 2018

Iowa Pharmacy Board's Refusal To Recommend Cannabis Exception Is Challenged

A petition (full text) for review of a July 18 decision by the Iowa Board of Pharmacy has been filed in an Iowa state trial court. In Olsen v. Iowa Board of Pharmacy, (IA Dist. Ct., filed 8/15/2018), petitioner contends that the Pharmacy Board abused its discretion when it refused to recommend to the state legislature that an exemption be added to the state drug laws to exempt religious use of cannabis by Rastafari. The Board took the position that it lacks expertise to evaluate the use of controlled substances for religious purposes. A number of posts on the issue are at Carl Olsen's Blog.

Washington's Work-Study Program Challenged Over Non-Sectarian Employer Requirement

A suit was filed last week in federal district court in the state of Washington challenging Washington's structuring of its Work-Study program. The Program provides financial aid to college students by paying part of a student's salary when the student is working for a participating employer, usually in a field related to the student's studies. Eligible employers, and jobs themselves, must be non-sectarian. The complaint (full text) in Summit Christian Academy v. Meotti, (WD WA, filed 8/14/2018) contends that excluding religious employers and sectarian work violates the free exercise clause, the equal protection clause and the Establishment Clause. Institute for Justice issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

Thursday, August 23, 2018

Arkansas Commission Refuses To Dismiss Complaint Against Anti-Death Penalty Judge

In an Aug. 20 Order (full text begins at pg. 5) the Arkansas Judicial Discipline and Disability Commission refused to dismiss Allegations (full text) filed in June against Circuit Court Judge Wendell Griffen complaining about his granting of a temporary restraining order barring use for executions of vecuronium bromide sold to the state. (Background). Griffen is charged with violating the Judicial Canon requiring impartiality through his participation in religious anti-death penalty rallies and vigils. Magnolia Banner News reports on the Commission's order.

Judge Authorizes Shut-Down of Cannabis-Based Church

A Riverside, California trial court judge last week authorized the city of Jurupa Valley to close down the Vault Church of Open Faith, a cannabis-based church that lists the prices for various kinds of marijuana online. According to the Press-Enterprise, the Vault's lead minister, Gilbert Aguirre, who has no formal religious training typically leads services which often include smoking or eating marijuana products. Jurupa Valley bans marijuana businesses of all kinds.

Muslim School Sues City Over Harassment At City Pool

A Muslim school in Wilmington, Delaware has filed suit against the city alleging religious discrimination against students in the school's summer day camp by personnel at the city's swimming pool. According to yesterday's Delaware Public Media, pool workers harassed pre-school students in the summer program of Darul Amaanah Academy because of the students' religious attire. Pool workers say they were enforcing a no-cotton policy, but parents say that children were traumatized.

Suit Challenges Exclusion of Sectarian Schools From Maine's High School Tuition Program

In Maine, small school districts that do not operate their own high schools or contract with a specific school for educational purposes, pay tuition for residents to attend a high school elsewhere in the state. However state law bars paying tuition for students to attend sectarian schools. On Monday a suit was filed challenging that exclusion. The complaint (full text) in Carson v. Hasson, (D ME, filed 8/21/2018), alleges that this exclusion violates the 1st and 14th Amendments. In a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit, First Liberty described the claims:

By singling out religious schools, and religious schools only, for discrimination, Maine violates the religious freedom and equal protection guarantees of the U.S. Constitution. As the U.S. Supreme Court’s Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for a 7-2 majority in last year’s Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer decision, excluding a church “from a public benefit for which it is otherwise qualified, solely because it is a church, is odious to our Constitution…and cannot stand.” Armed with this recent decision, IJ and FLI’s clients intend to vindicate the principle that government programs cannot discriminate against religion.

Wednesday, August 22, 2018

Court Orders More Briefs On RFRA Defense By Peace Protesters

In an Order last week in United States v. Kelly, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138195, (SD GA, Aug. 15, 2018), a Georgia federal magistrate judge instructed both sides to provide additional briefing on the "particularized issues raised by Defendants' RFRA defense" in the prosecution of peace activists for breaking into Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay. Defendants argue that their "symbolic disarmament" of nuclear weapons at the base was an exercise of their sincerely held Catholic beliefs. In ordering additional briefs, the court said in part:

At the August 2, 2018 motions hearing, counsel for both the Government and Defendants represented to the Court that Defendants' RFRA claim as a defense to criminal prosecution was an issue of first impression and that the applicability of RFRA to federal criminal law was an open question.... Subsequent to the hearing, however, the Government filed Supplemental Briefing that acknowledged RFRA's applicability to criminal prosecutions and its availability as a defense.... The Government now contends that Defendants' actions ... were not religious in nature and ... even assuming they were, the Government contends it has a compelling interest in protecting Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay....

Brunswick News reports on the court's Order.

Open Meeting Lawsuit Filed Growing Out of Alleged Anti-Jewish Curricular Materials

Jewish News Syndicate reports on a taxpayer lawsuit filed last week in state court in Massachusetts growing out of an ongoing dispute over teaching materials used in the Newton school system. Newton residents have contended that the schools are using anti-Jewish anti-Israel educational materials, including ones funded by the Saudi oil company ARAMCO and the government of Qatar. The lawsuit alleges violations of the state's open meeting laws, contending that month after month the minutes of the meetings of the Newton School Committee deliberately omit names and summaries of remarks by citizens who have appeared before the committee to complain about anti-Jewish materials and Islamic religious lessons. Critics of the curriculum also urge the firing of the current school superintendent.

Tuesday, August 21, 2018

Switzerland Denies Citizenship To Muslim Couple For Their Rejection of Gender Equality

BBC News reported last week that Swiss authorities have denied the citizenship application of a Muslim couple who refused to shake hands with individuals of the opposite sex during their citizenship interview. To obtain citizenship, an applicant must be well integrated into the Swiss community and demonstrate an attachment to the country, its institutions and a respect for its legal order. According to the report:

Officials stressed they were not rejected based on their religion but for their lack of respect for gender equality.

[Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Conservative Christian Groups Oppose Arkansas Tort Reform Ballot Measure

AP reports that Arkansas' proposed constitutional amendment on tort reform (full text) is receiving surprising opposition from conservative Christian anti-abortion groups:

A Christian group has begun rallying churches and abortion opponents against the measure, saying that limiting damage awards in lawsuits sets an arbitrary value on human life, contrary to anti-abortion beliefs, and conflicts with biblical principles of justice and helping the poor....

The Family Council, which championed Arkansas’ ban on gay marriages, is organizing meetings with church leaders to call for the measure’s rejection.

“The Bible is full of references to justice, and [the proposal] creates an environment where the powerful can tip the scales of justice against everybody else, but especially the poor,” Jerry Cox, the Family Council’s head, said at a recent breakfast meeting with pastors.

Pastors were handed informational booklets emblazoned with the words “Don’t Put A Price Tag On Human Life.” Flyers left on each table offered attendees inserts for their church bulletins.

Court Says Religious Commitment To Climate Justice Prevails Over Historic Preservation Rules

According to the Keene Sentinel, last week a Massachusetts trial court judge ruled that a church's religious commitment to climate justice takes precedence over historic preservation rules:

A Massachusetts Superior Court judge last week ordered Bedford’s Historic District Commission to allow the First Parish Church to install solar panels on the roof of the sanctuary. In what could be a precedent-setting decision, the congregation can install panels to generate electricity in keeping with a principle of “climate justice.” John Gibbons, senior minister of the church, said in a press release, “This ruling makes it possible for us to give more than lip service to our religious values, to walk our talk and to live in greater harmony with the rhythms of nature.”

In other words, parishioners believed they needed to do something to cut carbon emissions to protect the earth. That principle of their faith overruled a strict adherence to preservation of the historic character of their 200-year-old building.

DC Circuit Remands Suit On Anti-Sharia Bus Ads

In American Freedom Defense Initiative v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, (DC Cir., Aug. 17, 2018), the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals remanded for further development of an argument based on a intervening Supreme Court decision a challenge to WMATA's guidelines on advertising that may be displayed on buses and in rail stations. At issue is the constitutionality of a ban on "advertisements intended to influence members of the public regarding an issue on which there are varying opinions." AFDI wanted to rent space to display ads that

make the point that the First Amendment will not yield to Sharia adherent Islamists who want to enforce so-called blasphemy laws here in the United States, whether through threats of violence or through the actions of complicit government officials.

In a 2-1 decision, the majority held that WMATA did not engage in viewpoint discrimination in rejecting the ad. However, the U.S. Supreme Court's June 2018 decision in Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky , according to the majority, raised an additional issue that the parties should have the opportunity to brief:

whether the discretion vested in a government official to permit or prohibit speech is “guided by objective, workable standards.” Mansky, 138 S. Ct. at 1891.... We must determine whether Guideline 9 is so broad as to provide WMATA with no meaningful constraint upon its exercise of the power to squelch.....

The parties’ briefs predate the decision in Mansky. Yet Mansky invites arguments about whether Guideline 9 is capable of reasoned application.

Judge Henderson dissented, arguing that the suit should be dismissed on mootness grounds. WTOP reports on the decision.

Monday, August 20, 2018

VA Doctor's Statement Did Not Violate Establishment Clause

In Rose v. Borsos, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139466 (ED TN, Aug. 17. 2018), a Tennessee federal district court dismissed a claim by a VA hospital patient that a VA doctor violated the Establishment Clause when the doctor told the patient that "God would forgive [him] for committing suicide because of uncontrolled pain."

Trinity Western Drops Community Covenant Requirement For Students

As previously reported, in June the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the decision by two provinces to refuse to accredit Trinity Western University's proposed new law school. The provinces took the action because of the University's religious-based Community Covenant which, among other things, barred students, faculty and staff from "sexual intimacy that violates the sacredness of marriage between a man and a woman." In response, last week the University announced that the Covenant will no longer be mandatory for students. However, as reported by Inside Higher Ed, the Covenant will remain mandatory for faculty, staff and administrators. [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead via TaxProf Blog.]