Court Holds Federal Female Genital Mutilation Statute Unconstitutional

A Michigan federal district court today held, on federalism grounds, that the federal Female Genital Mutilation statute, 18 USC 116, is unconstitutional. The case involves the prosecution of medical personnel and of the mothers of minor girls in the small, Indian-Muslim Dawoodi Bohra community. (See prior posting.)  In United States v. Nagarwala, (ED MI, Nov. 20, 2018), the court rejected the government's argument that the statute can be supported as an exercise of Congress' treaty power or its power to regulate interstate commerce.

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which Congress ratified in 1992 (subject to certain understandings and reservations) requires the adoption of laws to protect the rights of minors. One of the understandings imposed by Congress was that ratification would not change the relative roles of the federal and state governments. The court said in part:

Congress overstepped its bounds in  legislating to prohibit FGM.... FGM is a "local criminal activity" which, in keeping with longstanding tradition and our federal system of government, is for the states to regulate, not Congress.

In rejecting the government's Commerce Clause arguments, the court said in part:

In the present case, the government has failed to show that FGM is a commercial activity. It claims that “[l]ike child pornography and marijuana, an interstate market exists for FGM.” ... Yet the government’s only evidence of such a market is the fact that it has alleged nine FGM victims in the present case, five of whom were brought to Michigan from neighboring states.... This is not a market, but a small number of alleged victims. If there is an interstate market for FGM, why is this the first time the government has ever brought charges under this 1996 statute? The government’s attempt to show that there is an interstate market for FGM falls flat; its comparison to the multi-billion-dollar interstate markets for marijuana and pornography is unsupported and unconvincing....

Finally, the government asserts that only a federal statute can deal with FGM because, as Congress asserted in its fourth finding, “the unique circumstances surrounding the practice of female genital mutilation place it beyond the ability of any single State or local jurisdiction to control.”... This argument fails for at least two reasons. First, the Commerce Clause allows Congress to regulate commercial activity that has a substantial effect on interstate commerce, not activity that is “beyond the ability of any single State or local jurisdiction to control.” Second, the government informs the Court that twenty-seven states have passed FGM statutes ... and nothing prevents the others from doing so.

Detroit News reports on the decision.

6h Circuit: Police Need Not Give Journalist Booking Photos of Woman Without Hijab

In Schlussel v. City of Dearborn Heights, (6th Cir., Nov. 19, 2018), the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected arguments by a journalist that the City violated her 14th and 1st Amendment rights when it refused her Michigan Freedom of Information Act request for booking photos that were taken of a Muslim woman, Malak Kazan, that showed her without her hijab.  The City's refusal was pursuant to a privacy policy it instituted in response to a previous suit by brought Kazan after her arrest. In this case journalist Deborah Schlussel argued unequal treatment because booking photos of Kazan had been furnished to Kazan's lawyer before the privacy policy was adopted. The court rejected Schussel's equal protection, as well as her Establishment Clause, argument.

Suit Seeking Cannabis Exemption For Rastafari Moves Ahead In Iowa

An Iowa state trial court has denied a motion by the Iowa Board of Pharmacy to dismiss a suit brought against it claiming that it abused its discretion when it refused to recommend to the state legislature an exemption for religious use of cannabis by Rastafari.  (Order in Olsen v. Iowa Board of Pharmacy, (IA Dist. Ct., Nov. 16, 2018). Links to all the pleadings in the case as well as to audio of oral arguments are available here. (See prior related posting.)

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Marc O. DeGirolami, The Sickness Unto Death of the First Amendment, (Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, Forthcoming).
• Gerald Lebovits, Holocaust Houdinis (Condensed Remembrance Version), (Just Us 12 (Apr. 2018) (Remembrance Issue No. 7)).
• Benjamin L. Berger, Liberal Constitutionalism and the Unsettling of the Secular, (in Rex Adhar, ed., Research Handbook on Law and Religion (Northampton, Mass: Edward Elgar, 2018), 198-220).
• Benjamin L. Berger, Religious Freedom in Canada: A Crucible for Constitutionalism, ([2018] 1 Quaderni di Diritto e Politica Ecclesiastica 111-125).
• Leslie Kendrick & Micah Schwartzman, The Etiquette of Animus, (Harvard Law Review, Vol. I32, No. 1, p. 33-70, 2018).
• Benjamin L. Berger, Assessing Adler: The Weight of Constitutional History and the Future of Religious Freedom, (National Journal of Constitutional Law (2018 Forthcoming)).
• Faisal Bhabha, Religious Freedom in a Multicultural Society, (Cardus Law Research Series on Religious Freedom (January 2017)).
• Zachary Price, Symmetric Constitutionalism: An Essay on Masterpiece Cakeshop and the Post-Kennedy Supreme Court, 70 Hastings L.J., Forthcoming).
• Steven Douglas Smith, An Open Letter to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, (2018).
• Rebecca Ruth Gould, Is the ‘Hate’ in Hate Speech the ‘Hate’ in Hate Crime? Waldron and Dworkin on Political Legitimacy, (Forthcoming, Jurisprudence).
• Joseph A. Seiner, The Discrimination Presumption, (Notre Dame Law Review, 2019 (Forthcoming)).

From SmartCILP:

• Erin E. Stiles, How to Manage a Marital Dispute: Legal Pluralism from the Ground Up in Zanzibar, 8 U.C. Irvine Law Review 275-297 (2018).

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Howard v. Polley, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 190747 (D NV, Nov. 6, 2018), a Nevada federal district court allowed a Muslim inmate to move ahead with his complaint that it takes up to several weeks for Muslim inmates to be screened so they can attend Jumu'ah services, while there is no screening for Christian and Jewish inmates.

In Kindred v. Allenby, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 191495 (ED CA, Nov. 8, 2018), a California federal magistrate judge held that an inmate's complaints regarding search and seizure of personal and religious property are subject to dismissal.

In Thomas v. Cox, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 192576 (D NV, Nov. 9, 2018), a Nevada federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 192645, Oct. 24, 2018) and denied a preliminary injunction to prevent destruction of videos of the prison culinary area in connection with his complaint that he was not furnished kosher meals.

In Hansler v. Kelley, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 192817 (WD AR, Nov. 13, 2018), an Arkansas federal district court dismissed a Wiccan inmate's complaint that his Wiccan Bible and Book of Grimoires were confiscated, and that there were no Wiccan religious leaders or volunteers to supervise its religious services.

In Doyle v. United States, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 192924 (ED KY, Nov. 13, 2018), a Kentucky federal district court dismissed a Hanafi Muslim inmate's complaint that inmates could pray in groups no larger than three.

In Shakanasa v. Allison, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 193482 (ND CA, Nov. 13, 2018), a California federal court allowed an inmate to move ahead with his complaint that he was not permitted to change his name or purchase religious items, and for retaliation.

In Wallace v. Solomon, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 193662 (WD NC, Nov. 14, 2018), a North Carolina federal district court dismissed an inmate's complaint that the policy providing for non-meat selections is inadequate to comply with Islamic dietary law.

Proposed HHS Rule Will Give Contraceptive Alternative To Women Excluded By Employers' Religious Objections

The New York Times reported yesterday that the Department of Health and Human Services has issued a new proposed rule that would blunt the impact of its recent final rules allowing employers to assert religious or moral objections to furnishing contraceptive coverage in their health plans. Under the proposed rule, any woman denied coverage from her employer because of the employer's religious or moral objections would be eligible for the family planning program for low income families offered under Title X of the Public Health Service Act, regardless of the woman's actual income. [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

Victim of Neo-Nazi Website Attacks Can Move Ahead With Lawsuit

In Gersh v. Anglin, (D MT, Nov. 14, 2018), a Montana federal district court denied a motion to dismiss made by Andrew Anglin, publisher of the alt-right website the Daily Stormer in a suit against him for invasion of privacy, intentional infliction of emotional distress and violation of Montana's Anti-Intimidation Act.  The suit was filed by Tany Gersh, a realtor who was the subject of abusive articles on Daily Stormer over her interactions with the mother of neo-Nazi leader Richard Spencer. As described by the court:

In the articles, Anglin described Gersh's behavior as extortion, and Anglin drew heavily on crude ethnic stereotypes, painting Gersh as acting in furtherance of a perceived Jewish agenda and using Holocaust imagery and rhetoric. He called for "confrontation" and "action"....

When Gersh filed her Complaint in the spring of 2017, she and her family had received more than 700 disparaging and/or threatening messages over phone calls, voicemails, text messages, emails, letters, social media comments, and Christmas cards. 

Refusing to dismiss the suit on free speech grounds without a more fully developed factual record, the court said in part:

At minimum, Gersh has made a plausible claim that Anglin' s speech involved a matter of strictly private concern.... 

The context of the case is, at first blush, public-a series of blog posts on an alt-right "news" blog, which often engages with political issues, albeit from an extremist viewpoint. However, under a liberal interpretation of the Complaint, the content of the speech may be seen as strictly private; Anglin launched a campaign of unrelated personal attacks on a Whitefish realtor, her husband, and their son because of a perceived conflict between Gersh and the mother of Anglin's friend, another white supremacist. Although Anglin drew heavily on his readers' hatred and fear of ethnic Jews, rousing their political sympathies, there is more than a colorable claim that he did so strictly to further his campaign to harass Gersh...

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

Employer's Proposed Religious Accommodations Were Adequate

In Miller v. Port Authority of New York & New Jersey, (D NJ, Nov. 13, 2018), a New Jersey federal district court held that the religious accommodations offered to a newly-hired Jewish employee (shift swapping or use of vacation or comp time) were reasonable and the employee's preferred accommodation of his Sabbath observance did not need to be offered. The court said in part:

The employees in Miller’s unit are unionized, and as a result, Port Authority is bound by a collective bargaining agreement. Creating a permanent shift schedule for Miller exempting him from work on the Sabbath or the Jewish holidays, without first offering that option to more senior employees, would have violated the agreement’s seniority provision. It also would have violated the past-practices provision of the agreement, which requires that the established rotational schedule be maintained. In short, Miller’s preferred accommodation would have placed Port Authority in violation of its collective bargaining agreement and required other, more senior employees to work less desirable additional Friday evening and Saturday shifts.

On this record, the religious accommodation offered by Port Authority was reasonable. And because the blanket exemption proposed by Miller would have imposed more than a de minimis hardship, the employer was not required to accept it.

[Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

Christian Student Group Sues University For Registration

A suit was filed in Colorado federal district court this week by a Christian student organization at the University of Colorado that was denied registered status because it requires its officers must share and personally hold its Christian beliefs. It also requires prospective members to agree with and promote the organization's purposes. Registered status gives an organization access to student activity fees. The complaint (full text) in Ratio Christi at the University of Colorado v. Sharkey, (D CO, filed 11/14/2018) alleges:

[The University] has promised to register Ratio Christi only if the group changes its leadership and membership criteria. That is, Plaintiffs must agree to abandon their rights to free speech, free association, free exercise of religion, freedom from unconstitutional conditions, due process, and equal protection to access campus resources available to all other student organization.

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

Free Exercise Claim Over Search Warrant Execution Fails

In Brown v. Scanlon, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 194049 (MD PA, Nov. 13, 2018), a Pennsylvania federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing a free exercise claim growing out of the execution of a search warrant at the residence of Shannon Brown.  Brown claims that her 1st Amendment rights were infringed when police forced her to lie on the floor handcuffed in her underwear during the search.  She says that as a Muslim woman, being in a state of undress around men caused her to feel defiled and embarrassed. She also complained that she was forced to remove her head scarf for her mugshot at the courthouse.

Catholic Diocese Opposes Taking of Church Land For Border Fencing

The Catholic Diocese of Brownsville, Texas filed suit in federal district court on Nov. 6 seeking a temporary restraining order to prevent the federal government from exercising its eminent domain power to take church land to construct border fencing and security.  According to the Brownsville Herald, last month the Department of Homeland Security waived more than two dozen laws to facilitate construction of border fencing through Hidalgo County and filed a Declaration of Taking that includes the La Lomita Chapel and Juan Diego Academy in Mission, Texas. The Diocese argues that the taking violates its free exercise rights and that the DHS waivers exceeded the authority granted by Congress.

New York's Top Court Denies Mandamus In Battle Against Kaporos Ritual

In Alliance to End Chickens as Kaporos v New York City Police Department, (NY Ct App, Nov. 14, 2018), New York state's highest court agreed that a petition for a writ of mandamus to require enforcement of public health and animal cruelty laws should be denied. According to the Court:

Plaintiffs allege those laws are routinely violated when thousands of chickens are killed during the religious practice of Kaporos performed in certain Brooklyn neighborhoods prior to Yom Kippur....

Enforcement of the laws cited by plaintiffs would involve some exercise of discretion.... Moreover, plaintiffs do not seek to compel the performance of ministerial duties but, rather, seek to compel a particular outcome. Accordingly, mandamus is not the appropriate vehicle for the relief sought.

WABC reports on the decision.

WAPO Runs Study of Southern Poverty Law Center

The Washington Post Magazine last week published a lengthy investigative article on the Southern Poverty Law Center.  Titled The State of Hate, frames the issue it explores as follows:

The SPLC was founded in 1971 to take on legal cases related to racial injustice, poverty and the death penalty. Then, in the early 1980s, it launched Klanwatch, a project to monitor Klan groups, neo-Nazis and other white supremacists. Their hate seemed self-evident. But eventually the SPLC began tracking — and labeling — a wider swath of extremism. And that’s when things became more complicated.

Today the SPLC’s list of 953 “Active Hate Groups” is an elaborate taxonomy of ill will.....

For decades, the hate list was a golden seal of disapproval, considered nonpartisan enough to be heeded by government agencies, police departments, corporations and journalists. But in recent years, as the list has swept up an increasing number of conservative activists — mostly in the anti-LGBT, anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim categories — those conservatives have been fighting back.....

Ironically, the assault on the SPLC comes at a time when, by other measures, it has reached a new peak of public regard. Last year the group raised a whopping $132 million through its famously relentless direct-mail appeals and other giving.

Get Religion has more on the WAPO article.

ACLU Settles Free Speech Suit Against Missouri City

ACLU of Missouri announced yesterday that it has settled a lawsuit which it filed earlier this year against the city of Wentzville after the city removed a woman from a Board of Alderman's meeting for criticizing a 16-foot "In God We Trust" sign that had been installed on the front of the meeting room dias. According to the ACLU:

Tonight, the Wentzville governing body passed and read aloud a resolution affirming its commitment to uphold First Amendment freedoms and acknowledging that members of the public of any or no religions tradition are welcome to participate in local government. The city also resolved to apply the updated city code evenhandedly, without censoring speech based on its content during the open forum portion of a Wentzville Board of Aldermen meeting.

The settlement also stipulates that Wentzville must advise law enforcement officers assigned to public meetings that they have an independent obligation to uphold the Constitution. Officers will now independently assess if probable cause exists before removing someone from a meeting.

9th Circuit Hears Oral Arguments In Title VII Case Against Salvation Army

On Tuesday, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in Garcia v. Salvation Army (video of full arguments). In the case, an Arizona federal district court dismissed a Title VII religious discrimination claim brought against the Salvation Army. Plaintiff claimed that she was subjected to discrimination, retaliation, and hostile work environment after she stopped attending Salvation Army services.  The court held that Title VII's religious organization exemption applies and that the Salvation Army did not waive the defense by failing to assert it as an affirmative defense. (See prior posting.) [Thanks to John Jackson for the lead.]

8th Circuit: Title VII Failure To Accommodate Does Not Equal Retaliation

In EEOC v. North Memorial Health Care, (8th Cir., Nov. 13, 2018), the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 decision, interpreted Title VII's unlawful retaliation provision. At issue is the interpretation of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a) that makes it illegal to discriminate against an employee or applicant for employment because the person "has opposed" an employer's discriminatory practices. In the case, an employment offer to a Seventh Day Adventist registered nurse was withdrawn because she was unable to work Friday night shifts and an accommodation was not feasible.  The majority held that merely requesting religious accommodation is not necessarily an expression of opposition to a denial of the accommodation.  Judge Grasz dissenting explained the opposing views:

I do share the Court’s apparent concern that Title VII not be read so that meritless discrimination claims based on a failure to accommodate may simply be repackaged and resurrected as retaliation claims. In my view, however, it is the causation element that properly does the work of weeding out such claims, not the opposition requirement. Where an employer, after denying an accommodation request that it is not legally obligated to grant, refuses to hire an applicant because the applicant cannot or will not perform the job without accommodation, the employer can show the legitimacy of the action.... Unlike such repackaged claims, the claim here should survive because there is evidence of retaliation, namely the evidence that Sure-Ondara told North Memorial she would work the job even without the accommodation and would show up for work if she could not find a replacement. Despite her willingness to work without accommodation, North Memorial withdrew its job offer, making it reasonable for a fact-finder to infer that it did so because she had requested an accommodation.

Chaplaincy Program of Wisconsin Justice Department Challenged

Suit was filed yesterday in a Wisconsin state trial court challenging the constitutionality of a new Chaplaincy Program for employees and their families created by the Wisconsin Department of Justice. The complaint (full text) in Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Schimel, (WI Cir. Ct., filed 11/13/2018),  alleges that six chaplains from across the state have been appointed initially-- all white males from Christian faiths. The program excludes secular mental health professionals. Chaplains operate under the direction of a paid Chaplaincy Program Coordinator. The suit contends that the program violates the U.S. Constitution's Establishment Clause.  FFRF issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

FBI Releases 2017 Hate Crimes Report

Yesterday the FBI released  its 2017 Hate Crime Statistics. The number of hate crime incidents increased 17% from last year-- 6,121 incidents in 2016 and 7,175 in 2017. However the year-to-year data may not be fully comparable since 1,000 additional agencies reported in 2017.  In 2017, hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,564 incidents (totaling 1,679 offenses), or 22% of all incidents. This compares with 1,273 incidents in 2016. (See prior posting). Hate crimes based on race comprised 58% of all incidents in 2017.  Of the religiously-motivated hate crimes in 2017, some 938 (60%) were anti-Jewish while 273 (17%) were anti-Muslim. 73 incidents were anti-Catholic. ADL issued a press release analyzing the report.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Buckley v. Munk, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 188322 (ND CA, Nov. 2, 2018), a California federal district court dismissed the complaint of an Orthodox Jewish former pre-trial detainee that he was not allowed to have candles and a particular prayer book or to wear his tallit katan outside his cell.

In Clark v. Foxwell, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 188343 (D MD, Nov. 1, 2018), a Maryland federal district court dismissed a suit by an inmate who said he is Jewish who complained that he did not receive proper kosher meals.

In Wali Ibn Abd-Ali v. Sibanda, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 188885 (WD PA, Nov. 2, 2018), a Pennsylvania federal magistrate judge recommended allowing a Muslim inmate to move ahead with his complaint that is ability to participate in the Ramadan fast was impeded, but recommended dismissing his claim that he could not participate in Eid feasts.

In Meeks v. Boulden, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 190037 (ED CA, Nov. 6,2018), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed, with leave to amend, an inmate's complaint that his religious beliefs prohibit him from drinking tap water and he was denied distilled or bottled water as an alternative.

In Alvarez v. Lassiter, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 190236 (WD NC, Nov. 6, 2018), a North Carolina federal district court dismissed an inmate's complaint that his religious books and literature were taken from him, violating his free exercise rights.

At Pope's Request, U.S. Bishops Postpone Vote On New Conduct Standards

Crux reports that in a surprise move, on Sunday night the Holy See notified Cardinal Daniel DiNardo, president of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, that the Pope wants U.S. bishops to postpone their vote on new standards of conduct for bishops and the creation of an outside commission to enforce it. The Pope wants the vote to wait until after a Feb. 21-24 international bishops' conference on clerical sex abuse.  In his opening address to the USCCB General Assembly in Baltimore yesterday (full text), Cardinal DiNardo said in part:

in light of this morning’s news, the nature of my address changes. We remain committed to the specific program of greater episcopal accountability that we will discuss these days. Consultations will take place. Votes will not this week. But we will prepare ourselves to move forward.

Jury Awards $3.2M To Muslim Employee For Religious Discrimination

According to the Press-Enterprise, last week a jury in a San Bernardino, California trial court awarded $3.2 million in damages for religious discrimination to a former warehouse employee at Loma Linda University Medical Center.  Muslim former employee Hugo Lizzaraga claimed that he was harassed for four years and ultimately was dismissed because of his Muslim religious beliefs.  Lizzaraga claimed that the harassment began after he converted to Islam and also broke his thumb and was placed on modified duty by his physician. A month before he was fired, he was suspended-- accused of telling a co-worker what he would have done differently in the 2015 San Bernardino terrorist shooting.

Albany Episcopal Bishop Defies Parent Body On Same-Sex Marriage Rites

In July, the General Convention of the Episcopal Church passed Resolution B012 Marriage Rites for the Whole Church, which was designed to give local congregational access to all couples wishing to have a same-sex marriage ceremony.  The Resolution stated in part:

[I]n dioceses where the bishop exercising ecclesiastical authority ... holds a theological position that does not embrace marriage for same-sex couples, and there is a desire to use such rites by same-sex couples in a congregation or worshipping community, the bishop exercising ecclesiastical authority ... shall invite, as necessary, another bishop of this Church to provide pastoral support to the couple...

Last week, in response to Resolution B012 that is to become effective on Dec. 3, the Bishop of Albany, William Love, who has been an opponent of same-sex marriage, issued a Pastoral Letter (full text) that reads in part as follows:

I cannot in good conscience as a bishop in God’s holy Church agree to what is being asked for in B012. While I respect the authority of General Convention as an institutional body, my ultimate loyalty as a bishop in God’s holy Church is to God....

Until further notice, the trial rites authorized by Resolution B012 of the 79th General Convention of the Episcopal Church shall not be used anywhere in the Diocese of Albany by diocesan clergy (canonically resident or licensed)....

Albany Times-Union reports on the Bishop's action.

Restaurant Settles EEOC Suit On Dress Code Accommodation

The EEOC last week announced the settlement of a religious discrimination suit it had filed against the operators of a Flowood, Mississippi restaurant, Georgia Blue.  The restaurant agreed to pay $25,000 to settle a complaint by an Apostolic Pentecostal waitress who objected to the company's dress code that required servers to wear blue jean pants.  The company had refused to accommodate her religious beliefs that women should only wear skirts or dresses. The settlement also requires the company to change its employee policies and to provide non-discrimination training to managers.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Thomas Scott-Railton, A Legal Sanctuary: How the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) Could Protect Sanctuary Churches, (Yale Law Journal, Forthcoming).
• Tamar Hostovsky Brandes, Israel's Nation-State Law – What Now for Equality, Self-Determination, and Social Solidarity?, (October 1, 2018).
• Jan Petrov, The Populist Challenge to the European Court of Human Rights, (The Jean Monnet Working Paper Series (NYU School of Law) 3/18 (2018).
• Eric Segall, Putting the 'Exercise' Back in the Free Exercise, (Kentucky Law Journal, Forthcoming).
• Elizabeth Kukura, Revisiting Roe to Advance Reproductive Justice for Childbearing Women, (Notre Dame Law Review Online, Vol. 94, 2018).
• Deborah Hellman, The Epistemic Commitments of Nondiscrimination, (Virginia Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper No. 2018-60 (2018).
• Yaoyao Fan, Kose John, Hong Liu & Luqyan Tamanni, Security Design, Incentives, and Islamic Microfinance: Cross Country Evidence, (October 14, 2018).

From SmartCILP and elsewhere:

• Judge Shams Al Din Al Hajjaji,  Government By Judiciary In Islam: Islamic Theory of Government and Mal/practice of Muslim Governments (Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Morocco), 48 California Western International Law Journal 283-339 (2018).
• Babak Manouchehrifar, Is Planning ‘Secular’? Rethinking Religion, Secularism, and Planning, [Abstract], Planning Theory and Practice (2018).

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Wright v. Bibens, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 187463 (D CT, Nov. 1, 2018), a Connecticut federal district court dismissed a Rastafarian inmate's complaint that he was denied common fare meals for 4 days after he was transferred to a different institution.

In Braun v. Sterno, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 187654 (D CT, Oct. 31, 2018), a Connecticut federal district court allowed a Native American inmate to move ahead with free exercise and RLUIPA claims against a correctional officer who dumped out his medicine bag and kicked and stomped sacred items in it.

In Harris v. Cearlock, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 187839 (CD IL, Nov. 2, 2018), an Illinois federal district court allowed an African Hebrew Israelite inmate to move ahead with his complaint that he was denied a religious diet.

In Jean-Pierre v. Clay, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 187606 (MD GA, Nov. 2, 2018), a Georgia federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 188138, Oct. 10, 2018) and allowed a Muslim inmate to move ahead only on his claim for nominal damages for restricting his prayer time during Ramadan, prohibiting him from leading prayers and other religious instruction, and removing him to isolation in retaliation for continuing to pray during Ramadan.

In Prosha v. Robinson, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 188313 (ED VA, Nov. 2, 2018), a Virginia federal magistrate judge allowed a House of Yahweh inmate to move ahead with his RLUIPA complaint that he did not receive an adequate religious diet during Passover.

Indian Court Says Jewish Divorce By Mutual Consent Not Permitted

Times of India today reports on a Sept. 24 decision by the Family Court in Mumbai denying a Jewish couple's petition for divorce by mutual consent.  Unlike the situation of numerous other religious groups, there is no codified statutory law in India governing Jewish divorces.  The court held that the divorce is governed by uncodified Jewish personal law, and the parties have not shown that divorce by mutual consent is allowed under Jewish law.

Challenge Filed To Texas' Limits On Marriage Celebrants

A suit was filed last week in a Texas federal district court challenging the constitutionality of Texas Family Code Section 2.202 which limits those who can officiate at marriage ceremonies to members of the clergy and various judges.  The complaint (full text) in Center for Inquiry, Inc. v. Warren, (ND TX, filed 11/5/2018) contends that the failure to allow secular celebrants to perform marriage ceremonies violates the Establishment Clause, the Equal Protection clause and Art. VI's ban on religious tests. Center for Inquiry issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

Suit Challenges Denial of Zoning Approval For Mosque

A suit was filed in a Michigan federal district court yesterday against the city of Troy, Michigan challenging the denial of a zoning variance for property acquired for use as a mosque and community center.  The complaint (full text) in Adam Community Center v. City of Troy, (ED MI, filed 11/9/2018), alleges RLUIPA and constitutional violations, saying in part:

31. The City of Troy currently has seventy-three (73) approved places of worship for various religions including Christian Churches and Hindu Temples. However, the city of Troy does not have a single approved Muslim Mosque or other Muslim religious institution within the city.

32. The city of Troy, through its Zoning Board of Appeals as well as planning commission employees, has on several occasions since 2013 recommended that Adam look to other cities as a better place to build their mosque and has stated that there are no places left in Troy where a mosque would be possible. This is despite the fact that there have been new Christian churches built and approved in the city of Troy between 2013 and 2018.

CAIR issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit. Detroit News reports on the lawsuit.

Satanic Temple Sues Netflix Over Wrongful Use Of Bahomet Statue

Yesterday The Satanic Temple filed suit in a New York federal district court against Netflix and Warner Brothers, seeking $50 million in damages.  The complaint (full text) in United Federation of Churches LLC v. Netflix, Inc., (SD NY, filed 11/8/2018), alleges that defendants wrongfully used the image of a statue belonging to the Satanic Temple in its television series Chilling Adventures of Sabrina. The Satanic Temple alleges that it spent $100,000 to develop the statue, Baphomet with Children, which is a modification of the historical deity Baphomet:

Baphomet historically involved a goat’s head ... on a female body associated with Lilith, a figure from Jewish mysticism sometimes considered a goddess of the night. The classic visual representation of idea of Baphomet is an image created in or about 1856 by an occult historian Eliphas Levi.... 

[T]he TST Baphomet with Children, consists of several modifications from the historic expressions of the deity....

The Sabrina Series’ evil antagonists stand in stark contrast to TST’s tenets and beliefs.... By misappropriating TST Baphomet with Children (which is a registered copyright and famous mark of TST) to publish this false and defamatory depiction of TST, Defendants have engaged in three classes of wrong: copyright infringement (Claim 1), trademark violation (Claim 2), and injury to business reputation (Claim 3).

In addition to damages, plaintiff seeks an injunction requiring defendants to digitally remove the statue from all future distributions of the TV program. Courthouse News and Reuters report on the lawsuit. [Thanks To Tom Rutledge for the lead.]

UPDATE: According to a Nov. 21 post by Lucien Greaves, the suit has been amicably settled, with the unique elements of the Satanic Temple’s Baphomet statue acknowledged in credits of episodes already filmed.

Preliminary Agreement Reached For Church of Greece Clergy To Lose Civil Servant Status

Reuters reports that in Greece on Tuesday, Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras and Archbishop Ieronymos of the Church of Greece reached a preliminary agreement to end the civil servant status of priests and auxiliary staff. Some 10,000 members of the clergy will no longer be paid directly by the government. Instead the government will annually transfer a subsidy to a special church fund for the payment of salaries. The agreement also contemplates settlement of a long-standing property dispute between the church and the Greek government. The agreement, which creates a brighter line between church and state, must still be approved by the cabinet, parliament and church leaders. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Attorneys Get Fee Award In Trinity Lutheran Case

Yesterday, a Missouri federal district court handed down a fee award to successful plaintiff's counsel in last year's important Trinity Lutheran case.  In the case, the Supreme Court ultimately upheld the right of a church to participate in a Missouri grant program for school playgrounds. In Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia v. Comer, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 190824 (WD MO, Nov. 7, 2018), the court awarded attorneys' fees totaling $433,792 for litigating the case from district court through the U.S. Supreme Court.  It also awarded costs and expenses of $32,593. Plaintiff had asked for attorney's fees totaling $840,605.

Arizona Voters Repeal Expansion of School Voucher Program

In Arizona on Tuesday, voters repealed Senate Bill 1431 which expanded the state's Empowerment Scholarship Accounts to make all public school students eligible to apply. The vote on the measure, known as Proposition 305, was 67% in favor of repeal, 33% opposed to repeal. The program allows students with disabilities (and certain other students) to opt out of public schools and instead receive state funds for use in private schools or for home schooling.

Guam Archdiocese Plans Chapter XI Filing

Guam's Archdiocese of Agana announced yesterday that it plans to file for bankruptcy reorganization within the next 90 days. The Archdiocese said that this is the most expeditious way to handle sexual abuse claims. Guam Daily Post, reporting on the Archdiocese's announcement, says that more than 180 sexual abuse claims against the Archdiocese are pending.

Kim Davis Loses Re-election Bid

According to the Lexington Herald-Leader, in Rowan County, Kentucky on Tuesday, county clerk Kim Davis lost her re-election bid by some 650 votes. Davis garnered national attention in 2015 by her adamant refusal to sign marriage licenses for same-sex couples. (See prior posting).

Trump Administration Finalizes Broadened Contraceptive Mandate Exemptions

In two releases yesterday, the Health and Human Services Administration, jointly with the IRS and Department of Labor, issued final rules making permanent (with minor changes) the interim final rules issued last October expanding exemptions from the contraceptive coverage mandate under the Affordable Care Act. One release (full text) finalizes exemptions for various entities and individuals with religious objections to providing coverage for some or all contraceptive or sterilization methods. The other release (full text) finalizes exemptions for entities and individuals with moral objections to providing such coverage. The final rules will become effective on Jan. 14, 2019.  Last December, two federal district courts issued nationwide preliminary injunctions against enforcing the interim final rules. RNS reports on the new rules.

Third Circuit Hears Arguments In Challenge To Foster Care Non-Discrimination Requirement

Courthouse News Service reports on Tuesday's oral arguments in the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in Fulton v. City of Philadelphia. In the case, a Pennsylvania federal district court rejected Catholic Social Services challenges to the requirement that it not discriminate against same-sex couples in foster care placement. (See prior posting.)

Abortion Measures Defeated In Oregon; Approved In West Virginia

Oregon voters yesterday apparently defeated, by a vote of 37% yes and 63% no, a proposed state constitutional amendment (Oregon Measure 106) that would have prohibited the expenditure of public funds directly or indirectly for abortion, except when medically necessary or required by federal law. These figures are based on tabulation of 68% of the votes.

Voters in West Virginia yesterday approved, by a vote of 51.7% yes and 48.3% no, Amendment 1 which amends the state constitution to add language providing "nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of abortion."

Suit Seeks To Impose Vaccination Exemption On Religious School

VIN News reports on a suit filed last month in a New York state trial court by parents who are seeking to require a Jewish day school to grant their 4-year old son a religious exemption from immunization requirements.  Yeshiva Oholei Torah requires children to be immunized in order to attend, and the school does not recognize exemption requests. The suit apparently contends that the religious exemption provision in New York's Public Health Law Sec. 2164(9) is mandatory for schools. The section provides that the mandatory vaccination requirements of state law "shall not apply to children whose parent, parents, or guardian hold genuine and sincere religious beliefs which are contrary to the practices herein required, and no certificate shall be required as a prerequisite to such children being admitted or received into school or attending school." The trial court denied an emergency injunction in the case last month to the parents who claim their religious freedom is being infringed.. A hearing on a preliminary injunction will be held next week. Some four dozen measles cases have been confirmed among yeshiva students in New York and New Jersey. [Thanks to Avram Schwartz for the lead.]

Alabamans Approve 10 Commandments and Right To Life Amendments

Alabama voters yesterday approved two state constitutional amendments. By a margin of 78% to 22%, voters approved Amendment 1, officially described as follows:

First, it provides that a person is free to worship God as he or she chooses, and that a person’s religious beliefs will have no effect on his or her civil or political rights. Second, it makes clear that the Ten Commandments may be displayed on public property so long as the display meets constitutional requirements, such as being displayed along with historical or educational items. Amendment 1 also provides that no public funds may be used to defend this amendment in court.

Voters, by a margin of 59% to 41% approved Amendment 2, officially described as follows:

Amendment 2 provides that it would be the public policy of the state to recognize and support the importance of unborn life and the rights of unborn children, including the right to life; and to protect the rights of unborn children. Additionally, the amendment would make clear that the state constitution does not include a right to abortion or require the funding of an abortion using public funds.

The proposed amendment does not identify any specific actions or activities as unlawful. It expresses a public policy that supports broad protections for the rights of unborn children as long as the protections are lawful.

Faith-Based Groups Push Voters To The Polls In Today's Mid-Term Elections

RNS yesterday reported on the extensive get-out-the vote campaigns mounted by religious groups. Detailing many of the efforts, the report says in part:

Waves of religious groups are mustering passionate get-out-the-vote efforts in the final hours before the heated midterm elections, with clergy pushing the faithful to the polls in ways that stand to aid both Republicans and Democrats.

Convincing religious voters to cast ballots on Election Day on Tuesday (Nov. 6) is hardly a new phenomenon in American politics. But this year’s atypically heated midterm contests appear to have sparked unusually robust efforts by faith-based organizations to galvanize supporters and move the political needle in favor of their respective values, if not their preferred candidates.

Canadian Diocese Wins Suit Against Insurance Company That Refused Coverage For Abuse Victims

In Aviva Insurance Company of Canada v. L’Évêque catholique romain de Bathurst, (NB Court of Appeal, Oct. 18, 2018), the New Bunswick Court of Appeal held that the Catholic Diocese of Bathurst is entitled to $3.35 million damages against its insurance company that refused to cover amounts paid to victims of clergy sexual abuse. The court said in part:

While the underlying facts of this litigation are most disturbing, at its core this is a breach of contract case involving a diocese that, over the years, purchased general public liability insurance from an insurer, which, many years later, when claims were made, wrongfully denied coverage. The question on appeal is whether the diocese is entitled to damages for breach of contract in amounts that involve the costs of, and payments made through, a conciliation process the diocese set up as a result of its insurer’s denial of coverage....

The Diocese’s right to damages did not rest on it being legally obligated to make the conciliation payments. The correct legal test is one of reasonableness; the trial judge was bound to follow this test and determine whether the conciliation process and the resulting payments were a reasonable response to breach of contract. I conclude the actions of the Diocese did constitute a reasonable response, within the boundaries of the law, to Aviva’s wrongful denial of coverage.

CNS reports on the decision.

Pakistan Blasphemy Case Is Not Over As Government Agrees To Seek Another Review

As previously reported, last week Pakistan's Supreme Court reversed the blasphemy conviction of Asia Bibi, a Christian woman who had been sentenced to death in 2010 for allegedly uttering derogatory remarks against the Prophet Muhammad. However hard-line Islamist opposition to the Court's decision has developed. CBS News reports:

Pakistan's top court acquitted Bibi on Wednesday of the charges carrying the death penalty, infuriating hard-line Islamists who held three days of nationwide protests demanding her execution. The enraged protesters torched scores of vehicles, blocked highways and attacked government and public property; a radical cleric also threatened to kill the three judges who acquitted Bibi. According to the Reuters news agency, Cleric Khadim Hussain Rizvi, who leads the Islamist Tehreek-e-Labbaik (TLP) party, had his Twitter account suspended on Monday for inciting violence.

The protests ended after the government agreed to impose a travel ban on Bibi and allow her case to be reviewed. A review petition was filed in the Supreme Court....

Earlier in the day, police said over 150 people were arrested on charges of arson, vandalism and violence during the protests.

Meanwhile, Al Jazeera reports that Bibi's lawyer has fled to the Netherlands after threats on his life.

Professor Sues Over Requirement To Address Students Using Their Preferred Pronoun

Yesterday a philosophy professor at Shawnee State University in Portsmouth, Ohio filed suit against the trustees and administrators at the school charging that they have violated his free exercise and free speech rights in the enforcement of the University's policy barring discrimination on the basis of gender identity.  The complaint (full text) in Meriwether v. Trustees of Shawnee State University, (SD OH, filed 11/5/2018) complains that University officials enforce university policies to require faculty to use the pronoun preferred by a student when addressing the student. Plaintiff, Prof. Nicholas Meriwether, asserts in part in his complaint:

85. Dr. Meriwether’s Christian faith governs the way he thinks about human nature, marriage, gender, sexuality, morality, politics, and social issues, and it causes him to hold sincerely-held religious beliefs in these areas.

86. Dr. Meriwether’s convictions concerning human nature, the purpose and meaning of life, and ethical standards that are to govern human conduct are drawn from the Bible.

87. Dr. Meriwether believes that God created human beings as either male orbfemale, that this gender is fixed in each person from the moment of conception, and that it cannot be changed, regardless of an individual’s feelings or desires.

88. Dr. Meriwether also believes he cannot affirm as true ideas and concepts that are not true, as this would violate Biblical injunctions against dishonesty and lying.

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

Supreme Court Denies Cert. In Ministerial Exception Case

The U.S. Supreme Court today denied review in Grusgott v. Milwaukee Jewish Day School, Inc., (Docket No. 18-125, certiorari denied 11/5/2018). (Order List.)  In the case, the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals held that the ministerial exception applies to prevent a former Hebrew teacher in a Jewish day school from suing for her firing in violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act. (See prior posting.)

Ballot Issues To Watch In Tomorrow's Elections

Several ballot measures that may be of interest to Religion Clause readers will be voted on around the country tomorrow:

• Alabama Ten Commandments Amendment, Amendment 1
• Alabama State Abortion Policy Amendment, Amendment 2
• Oregon Ban Public Funds for Abortions Initiative
• West Virginia Amendment 1, the No Right to Abortion in Constitution Measure

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Elizabeth A. Brown & Inara Scott, Belief v. Belief: Resolving LGBTQ Rights Conflicts in the Religious Workplace, (American Business Law Journal, Forthcoming).
• John Melcon, Thou Art Fired: A Conduct View of Title VII's Religious Employer Exemption, (Rutgers Journal of Law and Religion, Forthcoming).
• Louis W. Hensler, Moses’ Restatement of Torts: Modern Principles of Justice and Efficiency in the Mishpatim, (October 10, 2018).
• Sohail Wahedi, Abstraction from the Religious Dimension, (Buffalo Human Rights Law Review, Vol. 24, No. 1, 2017-2018).
• Alisha Patton, Harris and Whole Woman’s Health Collide: No Funding Provisions Unduly Burden Reproductive Freedom, (Hastings Law Journal, Forthcoming).
• Sam Fox Krauss, Moral Market Design, (Kansas Journal of Law & Pubic Policy, Vol. 28, No. 2, 2019).
• Ji Ma, Funding Nonprofits in a Networked Society: Two Modes of Crowding Mechanism of Government Support, (July 17, 2018).
• Timothy M. Todd, Exogeneity vs. Endogeneity in Section 170’s Quid Pro Quo Test, (State Tax Notes, Vol. 90, pp. 37-44, Oct. 1, 2018; Tax Notes, Vol. 161, pp. 65-72, Oct. 1, 2018).

From SSRN (European and Australian Law):

• Eva Brems , Saïla Ouald Chaib & Katrijn Vanhees, 'Burkini' Bans in Belgian Municipal Swimming Pools: Banning As a Default Option, (Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, December 2018).
• Brett Crumley, & John Picton, Still Standing? Cy-près and Charitable Service Users in the First-tier Tribunal (Charity), (Conveyancer and Property Lawyer, (2018) 82 Conv 262 – 279).
• Ian Ramsay & Corinne Tan, Social Impact Bonds in Australia, (Journal of Banking and Finance Law and Practice, Vol. 29, No. 3, 2018, pp. 248-257).

From SSRN (Islamic Law):

• Fajri Muhammadin, Dian Agung Wicaksono, Almonika Sari & Ola Ayutama,  Lashing in Qanun Aceh and the Convention Against Torture: A Critical Appraisal, (Jurnal Media Syariah, Vol. 20, No. 1 (2018)).
• Vina Berliana Kimberly, Novita Dwi Lestari &  and Fajri Muhammadin, Incorporating Qawaidh Fiqhiyyah to the 'Principles of Law' Chapter in the Introduction to Jurisprudence Course in Indonesia's Legal Education, (Proceeding of the International Conference on Research in Islamic Education (ICRIE), Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 2018).
• Nurizal Ismail, Fajri Muhammadin & Hanindito Danusatya, The Urgency to Incorporate Maqasid Shari’ah as an Eludication of ‘Benefit’ as a Purpose of Law in Indonesia’s Legal Education, (Proceeding of the 1st International Conference on Law, Technology, and Society (ICOLESS) 2018, Batu, Indonesia, October 24-25, 2018).

From SmartCILP:

• Logan A. Yelderman, Monica K. Miller & Alicia DeVault, Led By the Spirit: Integrating Social Science and Law to Better Understand the Impact of Jurors' Religious Beliefs, [Abstract], 9 Faulkner Law Review 227-249 (2018).
• John H. Calvert, The Absence of Religious Neutrality in K-12 Public Science Education, 12 Liberty University Law Review 571-662 (2018).
• Anton Sorkin, Make Law, Not War: Solving the Faith/Equality Crisis, 12 Liberty University Law Review 663-734 (2018).
• Shael Herman, The Acre Bible: Recasting Hebrew Scripture for Crusaders and the Christian Flock, 33 Tulane European & Civil Law Forum 75-100 (2018).

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Forehand v. Sapp, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 183729 (MD GA, Oct.26, 2018), a Georgia federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 183990, Sept. 21, 2018) and permitted an inmate to move ahead with his complaint that he was required to choose between observing the Ramadan fast or the Nation of Islam December fast; he was not permitted to observe both.

In Butler v. California Department of Corrections, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 184220 (ND CA, Oct. 26, 2018), a California federal district court dismissed an inmate's complaint that his request for Nation of Islam videos be broadcast on the CTF system-wide television channel was denied and that there is not an NOI chaplain.

In Brown v. Semple, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185456 (D CT, Oct. 30, 2018), a Connecticut federal district court allowed an inmate to move ahead with his free exercise complaint alleging that he was not allowed to have a Wicca bible that was sent to him. His Establishment Clause and equal protection complaints were dismissed without prejudice.

In Lane v. Avery, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 184649 (ED AR, Oct. 29, 2018), an Arkansas federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185647, Oct. 11, 2018) and dismissed an inmate's complaint that he was deprived of his Bible while on "behavior control" and was prevented him from "fellowshipping" with other believers during holy days because he was kept in ad seg.

In Elias v. Kinross, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185869 (ED CA, Oct. 29, 2018), a California federal magistrate judge allowed a Wiccan inmate to move ahead with his complaint that ink he was using for a religious ceremony was confiscated.

In Stewart v. Sheahan, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 186253 (WD NY, Oct. 29, 2018), a New York federal district court allowed a Muslim inmate to move ahead with his complaint that he was no provided Ramadan meals for four consecutive days.

In Simmons v. Gilmore, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 187293 (WD PA, Oct. 31, 2018), a Pennsylvania federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing without prejudice an inmate's complaint that his receiving only 3 haircuts in 10 months violated his Spiritual Scientist religious beliefs as to personal hygiene.

Supreme Court Agrees To Review Bladensburg Cross Case

The U.S. Supreme Court yesterday granted certiorari in two appeals stemming from the same 4th Circuit opinion. The petitions for review were granted in American Legion v. American Humanist Association (Docket No. 17-1717) and Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission v. American Humanist Association (Docket No.  18-18). (Cert. granted, 11/2/2018). (Order List). In the case, the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeal, in a 2-1 decision, held that the 40-foot high Bladensburg Cross that has stood for over 90 years as a World War I Veterans' Memorial, violates the Establishment Clause. (See prior posting.) The Circuit Court, by a vote of 8-6, then denied en banc review. (See prior posting). Here is the SCOTUS blog case page for the cases, with links to filings in the case.  WTOP News reports on the grant of review.

NYT Profiles Political Views of Young Evangelicals

The New York Times yesterday carried a long feature article on the political views of young Christian evangelicals. The article features interviews with six young evangelicals of different political affiliations.

South Korea's Supreme Court Recognizes Conscientious Objection To Military Draft

According to AFP, South Korea's Supreme Court yesterday-- by a vote of 9-4-- ruled that religious and moral beliefs are valid reasons to refuse the country's military conscription. The ruling, which overruled prior precedent, came in the case of a Jehovah’s Witness conscientious objector who had been convicted by lower courts. Refusing the draft has typically resulted in an 18-month prison term. Some 19,000 conscientious objectors have been jailed since 1950, with 96 currently in prison.

Free Exercise Defenses Rejected In Conviction of Temple Operator For Prostitution

In State of Arizona v. Elise, (AZ App., Nov. 1, 2018), an Arizona state appellate court upheld against free exercise defenses the conviction of the operator of the Phoenix Goddess Temple. Tracy Elise was convicted of money laundering, pandering, and operating the Temple as a house of prostitution.  The court rejected defendant's 1st Amendment defense, finding that the statutes under which defendant was convicted are neutral laws of general applicability.  It rejected defenses under the Arizona Free Exercise of Religion Act, finding that defendant "did not prove the sexual acts performed at the Temple were motivated by a religious belief, rather than for pecuniary gain."

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Priest v. Holbrook, (9th Cir., Oct. 31, 2018), the 9th Circuit reversed the district court's dismissal of a Native American inmate's complaint that his golden eagle feathers were confiscated.

In McCracken v. Godert, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178074 (ED MO, Oct. 17, 2018), a Missouri federal district court allowed an inmate who is a Native American Medicine Man to move ahead with his complaint that the prison's ban on tobacco failed to provide an exception for religious ceremonies.

In Ross v. Sandoval, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 179876 (D NV, Oct. 19, 2018), a Nevada federal district court granted a preliminary injunction requiring that a Buddhist inmate be placed on the common fare diet.

In Barnes v. Daviess County Detention Center, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 180713 (WD KY, Oct. 19, 2018), a Kentucky federal district court allowed a Muslim inmate to move ahead with his complaint that during Ramadan he has not been able to engage in prayers or have a clean uniform in which to pray.

In Franklin v. York, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 180832 (ND NY, Oct. 16, 2018), a New York federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing a Muslim inmate's complaint regarding a prayer rug, Ramadan meals, and receipt of mail including a prayer schedule. UPDATE: The court adopted the magistrate's recommendation at 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 190161, Nov. 7, 2018.

In Archibald v. Warren County Regional Jail, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 181336 (WD KY, Oct. 23, 2018), a Kentucky federal district court allowed a Muslim inmate to move ahead with his complaint regarding Ramadan meals.

In Clinton v. Duby, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182079 (WD MI, Oct. 24, 2018), a Michigan federal district court allowed an inmate to move ahead with claims growing out of denial of his approved religious vegan diet.

In Jones v. North Carolina Department of Public Safety, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182150 (WD NC, Oct. 23, 2018), a North Carolina federal district court dismissed a Muslim inmate's complaint that he was told to shave his beard before he could interview for a work release job.

Pakistan's Supreme Court Reverses Blasphemy Conviction of Asia Bibi

In a widely followed case, the Pakistan Supreme Court yesterday reversed the blasphemy conviction of Asia Bibi, a Christian woman who had been sentenced to death in 2010 for allegedly uttering derogatory remarks against the Prophet Muhammad. The statements were allegedly made after Bibi got into an argument with two Muslim women while picking berries in a field.  The Muslim women refused to accept water from Bibi because she was Christian. In Bibi v. The State, (Pak. Sup. Ct., Oct 31, 2018), a 3-judge panel concluded (in a 34-page opinion) that the charges against Bibi had not been adequately proven, since the lower courts relied on contradictory testimony and the trial court relied on a confession that was given under pressure.  Justice Nisar's majority opinion alluded to the misuse of blasphemy prosecutions in Pakistan:

[N]o one could be allowed to defy the name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم ) and be left unpunished, but there is another aspect of the matter; sometimes, to fulfill nefarious designs the law is misused by individuals leveling false allegations of blasphemy. Stately, since 1990, 62 people have been murdered as a result of blasphemy allegations, even before their trial could be conducted in accordance with law.

Judge Khosa filed a 21-page concurring opinion, in which he observed:

It is ironical that in the Arabic language the appellant’s name Asia means ‘sinful’ but in the circumstances of the present case she appears to be a person, in the words of Shakespeare’s King Leare, “more sinned against than sinning”.

The Guardian reports on the decision and reactions to it:

By the afternoon, thousands of club-wielding demonstrators had blocked highways, burned tyres and pelted police with stones in major cities including Islamabad and Karachi.

Anti-Semitism Suit Against San Francisco State Dismissed

In Mandel v. Board of Trustees of the California State University, (ND CA, Oct. 29, 2018), a California federal district court dismissed an amended complaint charging that San Francisco State University tolerated, or even encouraged, anti-Semitic conduct. The court summarized its holding:

While I understand that these plaintiffs, and some other members of the Jewish or Israeli community in or around SFSU, feel deeply that SFSU has not done enough to curtail others’ anti-Semitic behaviors and to foster a better environment for Jewish and pro-Israeli students, the acts described in the SAC do not adequately allege a violation of federal anti-discrimination laws so that liability may be imposed on SFSU, its administrators, or its faculty.

San Francisco Chronicle reports on the decision.

Bodies of Pittsburgh Shooting Victims Handled According To Religious Law

The New York Times reported yesterday on the arrangements at the scene of the Pittsburgh synagogue massacre to assure that bodies of the victims were handled in conformity with Jewish religious law:

All night long, Jewish volunteers stood solemnly in the rain outside the Tree of Life synagogue, where 11 dead bodies lay inside, sealed off with yellow crime-scene tape. The deceased were not supposed to be left alone, according to Jewish tradition, from the moment of death until burial. So when the medical examiner removed the bodies at 5 a.m. Sunday, the volunteers were there to escort them to the morgue....

Once homicide investigators give them the all clear, they intend to meticulously clean the crime scene. They consider everything left behind to be sacred remains, to be preserved and buried with the bodies....

Although autopsies are generally avoided in Jewish tradition, there was no doubt that each of the bodies would need to be examined for evidence in the criminal case. Once the bodies were with the medical examiner, Mr. Wasserman [head of the burial society] ensured that a shomer, as the guard is called in Hebrew, was in the building to keep watch over them as they went through the process.

[Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

Hawaii Supreme Court Approves Manua Kea Telescope

In In re Thirty Meter Telescope at the Mauna Kea Science Reserve, (HI Sup. Ct., Oct. 30, 2018), the Hawaii Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the state's Board of Land and Natural Resources allowing a 30 meter telescope to be erected near the summit of Mauna Kea.  Native Hawaiian cultural practitioners believe that Mauna Kea should be kept in its natural state as a sacred manifestation of their ancestry. Hawaii's Constitution (Art. XII, Sec. 7) protects the cultural and religious rights of the descendants of Native Hawaiians. The Court's majority opinion by Justice McKenna upheld the agency's finding that while Native Hawaiian cultural practitioners use the summit of Mauna Kea, there is no evidence that they use the Thirty Meter Telescope Observatory site area and the Access Way. The Court also rejected appellants' RLUIPA challenge, holding that RLUIPA does not apply to the government's management of its own land. New York Times reports on the decision. [Thanks to  Kuliaikanu'u Petzoldt for the lead.]

DOJ Expands Hate Crime Resources

The Department of Justice today is concluding a two-day Law Enforcement Roundtable on Improving the Identification and Reporting of Hate Crimes. (Press release). In connection with the Roundtable it announced a new Hate Crimes website "designed to provide a centralized portal for the Department’s hate crimes resources for law enforcement, media, researchers, victims, advocacy groups, and other related organizations and individuals." Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein also announced a grant to the University of New Hampshire for a national survey on hate crime incidents and victimization. He also announced the extension of an existing technical assistance program to the prosecution and prevention of hate crimes.

Cert. Filed In Touro Synagogue Ownership Dispute

Last week a petition for certiorari (full text) was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in Congregation Jeshuat Israel v. Congregations Shearith Israel, (cert. filed 10/22/2018). In the case, the U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals held that Rhode Island's historic Touro Synagogue is owned by New York's Shearith Israel congregation. The court also concluded that a pair of historic silver Torah ornaments worth some $7 million are also owned by the New York congregation. (See prior posting.) Providence Journal reports on the petition for review.

Irish Voters Approve Elimination of Blasphemy As A Crime

In a referendum held last Friday, voters in Ireland approved removal from Sec. 40.6.1 of the Irish Constitution the language that makes blasphemy a crime.  As reported by BBC News, the vote was 64.85% voting in favor of decriminalizing blasphemy, and 35.15% against.  The removal of the language from the Constitution permits the Oireachtas to amend or repeal Sec. 36 of the Defamation Act of 2009 in order to eliminate blasphemy as a crime. (Background on referendum). See prior related posting.  [Thanks to Law & Religion UK for the lead.]

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Effie Fokas, The Legal Status of Religious Minorities: Exploring the Impact of the European Court of Human Rights, (Social Compass, 2017, 65(1), 25-42).
• Haniff Ahamat & Nasarudin Abdul Rahman, Halal Food, Market Access and Exception to WTO Law: New Aspects Learned from Indonesia — Chicken Products, (Asian Journal of WTO & International Health Law and Policy, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 355-373, September 2018).
• Wayne Barnes, The Paradox of Christian-Based Political Advocacy: A Reply to Professor Calhoun, (74 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. Online 489 (2018)).
• Helen M. Alvare, Is This Any Way to Make Civil Rights Law? Judicial Extension of 'Marital Status' Nondiscrimination to Protect Cohabitants, (Georgetown Journal of Law & Public Policy, Forthcoming).
• Paulo Pinto de Albuquerque & Andrea Scoseria Katz, Is Religion a Threat to Human Rights? Or is It the Other Way Around? Defending Individual Autonomy in the ECtHR's Jurisprudence on Freedom of Religion, (Religion and International Law: Living Together 277-293 (Robert Uerpmann-Wittzack, Evelyne La-grange, and Stefan Oeter eds. 2018)).
• Effie Fokas, The Secular Court?, (November 1, 2016).
• ZW Taylor, Sources of Free Speech in U.S. Higher Education: What the Law Tells Us, (September 27, 2018).
• Thomas Colby, The Other Half Of The Abortion Right, (20 University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law 1043 (2018)).
• Pooja Dadhania, Deporting Undesirable Women, (9 UC Irvine L. Rev. 53 (2018)).

11th Amendment Dismissal Avoids Ruling On Free Exercise Challenge To Medicaid Rule

In Scott v. Virginia Department of Medical Assistance Services, (WD VA, Oct. 19, 2018), a Virginia federal district court dismissed on 11th Amendment grounds a suit challenging a state Medicaid rule that deny payment for in-home care services rendered by the parent of a minor child. Here the state refused to grant an exception to allow a child's stepfather to be paid as an attendant caregiver.  The child's mother had argued that her religious beliefs require that only a male relative can help bathe her son, that parents be the primary caretakers of their children, and that no male other than her husband, father, or brother be in the house alone with her. Avoiding a ruling on the merits, the court held:

Scott brought her suit against DMAS itself, rather than the appropriate state official charged with the specific duty of enforcing the contested DMAS policy. Thus, the Ex Parte Young exception does not apply, and her suit is barred regardless of the relief sought.

Prison Cannot Limit Participation In Native American Religious Ceremonies To Ethnic Native Americans

In Guardado v. Nevada, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 177365 (D NV, Oct. 16, 2018), a Nevada federal district court held that a Mexican-American inmate's free exercise rights protected by RLUIPA were violated when the Nevada prison system implemented a requirement of the Nevada Indian Commission that participation in Native American religious ceremonies in prison be limited to those of Native American heritage. Plaintiff had argued that no other religion requires inmates to show proof of their ethnicity to practice their beliefs. The court, concluding that it need not reach plaintiff's equal protection arguments since the practice violates RLUIPA, held:

Here, the Court is satisfied that Plaintiff's Native American religious beliefs are sincerely held. Further, AR 810 is a substantial burden on Plaintiff's free exercise as he is Mexican-American and cannot show that he is Native American or provide documentation that he is registered or affiliated with any recognized tribe.... Defendants have not shown that any safety or security issues are likely to arise from Plaintiff's participation in Native American religious ceremonies.

The court issued a preliminary injunction requiring  that defendants permit Ernest Guardado "to participate in Native American religious ceremonies with the Native American practitioners including sweat lodge, prayer circle, drum circle, smudging, sacred pipe, and access to the Native Indian grounds."

Charges Filed Against Accused Pittsburgh Synagogue Shooter

The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Western District of Pennsylvania announced tonight the charges that are being filed against the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania synagogue shooter:

On Saturday, October 27, 2018, at 8:05 p.m., U.S. Magistrate Judge Robert C. Mitchell signed a criminal complaint charging Robert Bowers of Baldwin, Pa., with 29 counts setting forth federal crimes of violence and firearms offenses. The crimes of violence are based upon the federal civil rights laws prohibiting hate crimes. The FBI in Pittsburgh is leading the investigation."

The federal complaint alleges that Bowers committed the following crimes on or about October 27, 2018, in the Western District of Pennsylvania:

• Eleven counts of Obstruction of Exercise of Religious Beliefs Resulting in Death (18 U.S.C. §§ 247(a)(2) and 247(d)(1))

• Eleven counts of Use of a Firearm to Commit Murder During and in Relation to a Crime of Violence (18 U.S.C. §§ 924(c)(1)(A) and 924(j)(1)

• Four counts of Obstruction of Exercise of Religious Beliefs Resulting in Bodily Injury to a Public Safety Officer 18 U.S.C. §§ 247(a)(2) and 247(d)(3))

• Three counts of Use and Discharge of a Firearm During and in Relation to a Crime of Violence (18 U.S.C. §§ 924(c)(1)(A) and 924(iii))

UPDATE: The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports on state charges that have also been filed against Bowers:

Later Saturday, Pittsburgh police filed 11 counts of criminal homicide against Mr. Bowers, along with six counts of attempted homicide; six counts of aggravated assault and 13 counts of ethnic intimidation.

Government Brief To SCOTUS Says Title VII Does Not Ban Transgender Discrimination

On Wednesday, the Justice Department filed a brief (full text) with the U.S. Supreme Court arguing that Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act does not cover discrimination against an individual based on gender identity. The brief follows the position taken by the Trump Administration in an Oct. 2017 Justice Department Memo.  The brief was filed in response to the petition for certiorari in R.G. and G.R. Harris Funeral Homes, Inc. v. EEOC, in which the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals held that a Michigan funeral home violated Title VII when it fired a transgender employee who was in the process of transitioning from male to female. (See prior posting.) The government's brief ultimately urges the court to hold the petition in this case pending its decision on whether to grant review in two other cases raising similar issues. NBC News reports on the DOJ brief. SCOTUS blog has links to all the briefs filed with the Supreme Court in the case.

Japanese Court Rejects Challenge To Prime Minister's Visit To Yasukuni Shrine

Kyodo News reports on a decision by a Japanese appellate court yesterday holding that a 2013 visit by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to the Yasukuni Shrine did not violate the religious freedom of the 450 citizens who brought the lawsuit. The shrine honors millions of war dead, but also convicted war criminals, and the Prime Minister's visit, according to the plaintiffs heightened international tensions.  The court held that the visit did not interfere with plaintiffs' faith.

European Court Upholds Conviction For Calling Muhammad A Pedophile

As reported by the Daily Mail, in E.S. v. Austria, (ECHR, Oct. 25, 2018) the European Court of Human Rights ruled unanimously in a Chamber Judgment that Austria did not violate free speech protections of the European Convention on Human Rights, Sec. 10, when it convicted a speaker of disparaging religious precepts.  The speaker, a woman identified as E.S., made a statement disparaging Muhammad at a seminar titled “Basic information on Islam” presented at the right-wing Freedom Party Education Institute. Her presentation labelled Muhammad's marriage to Aisha as pedophilia  As summarized by the Court's Information Note on the decision, the Court held:

The applicant’s statements had been capable of arousing justified indignation given that they had not been made in an objective manner aimed at contributing to a debate of public interest, but could only have been understood as aimed at demonstrating that Muhammad was not a worthy subject of worship.... Presenting objects of religious worship in a provocative way capable of hurting the feelings of the followers of that religion could be conceived as a malicious violation of the spirit of tolerance, which was one of the bases of a democratic society....

The applicant had subjectively labelled Muhammad with paedophilia as his general sexual preference, while failing to neutrally inform her audience of the historical background, which consequently did not allow for a serious debate on that issue, and had thus made a value judgement without sufficient factual basis.... As to the applicant’s argument that a few individual statements had to be tolerated during a lively discussion, it was not compatible with Article 10 of the Convention to pack incriminating statements into the wrapping of an otherwise acceptable expression of opinion and deduce that this would render the statements, exceeding the permissible limits of freedom of expression, passable. Moreover, the applicant had been wrong to assume that improper attacks on religious groups had to be tolerated even if they were based on untrue facts.

Chamber judgments may be appealed to the Grand Chamber. [Updated to provide link to full text of decision. Thanks to Seth Tillman for the link.]

Suit Against Drag Queen Story Hour Dismissed

Last Friday a suit was filed in federal district court in Houston, Texas seeking to stop a city sponsored drag queen story hour that is scheduled for the Houston Public Library. Plaintiffs argued that the story hour violates their religious free exercise. (Houston Chronicle). Yesterday the court dismissed the suit in a four-sentence order, concluding that there is no basis for the requested relief. (Houston Chronicle).

Oral Arguments In 7th Circuit Challenge To Parsonage Allowance

Yesterday the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in Gaylor v. Peecher. (Audio recording of full oral arguments.) In the case, a Wisconsin federal district court held that the parsonage allowance provision in Sec. 107(2) of the Internal Revenue Code violates the Establishment Clause. (See prior posting.)  Courthouse News Service reports on the oral arguments.

D.C. Opens Investigation of Local Clergy Sexual Abuse Charges

The Washington Post reported yesterday that the office of the District of Columbia Attorney General has opened a civil investigation into charges of sexual abuse by Catholic clergy in the Diocese of Washington. Earlier this month, Pope Francis accepted the resignation of the Diocese's Archbishop Cardinal Donald Wuerl after controversy over his handling of abuse claims as head of the Pittsburgh (PA) Diocese. (See prior posting.) According to yesterday's Post report:

D.C. statutes allow the attorney general to subpoena documents and seek penalties against a nonprofit — up to and including dissolving it — if it “has exceeded or abused and is continuing to exceed or abuse the authority conferred upon it by law” or if it “has continued to act contrary to its nonprofit purposes.”

[Attorney General Karl] Racine said that any felony crimes his office discovers in the course of its probe would be forwarded to the U.S. attorney. Racine’s staff could also prosecute any violations of the District’s mandated reporting requirements — which would be misdemeanors — separately from the civil investigation.