Monday, June 07, 2021

Supreme Court Grants Cert. In Challenge To Surveillance of Muslims

The U.S. Supreme Court today granted review in Federal Bureau of Investigation v. Fagazi, (Docket No. 20-828, certiorari granted 6/7/2021). (Order List). In the case, a 3-judge panel of the 9th Circuit held that three Muslim plaintiffs may move ahead with many of their claims growing out of an FBI investigation that they allege involved unlawful searches and anti-Muslim discrimination. Subsequently the panel filed an amended opinion and the 9th Circuit denied en banc review. However, ten judges joined all or most of an opinion dissenting from the denial of en banc review. At issue is the relationship between the provisions of FISA and the state secrets privilege. Here is the SCOTUSblog case page with links to all the filings in the case. Politico has additional background.

Recent Articles of Interest

 From SSRN:

From SmartCILP:

FFRF Wins Right To Display "Bill of Rights Nativity Scene"

In Freedom from Religion Foundation v. Abbott, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104950 (WD TX, May 5, 2021), on remand from the 5th Circuit, a Texas federal district court issued a declaratory judgment and an injunction barring state officials from excluding FFRF's "Bill of Rights Nativity Exhibit" from display space in the state capitol building under now-revised rules. The court said in part:

Defendants violate the Foundation's First Amendment rights and engage in viewpoint discrimination as a matter of law when they exclude the Foundation's Exhibit based on the perceived offensiveness of its message.

The court however rejected plaintiff's claim that the state has unconstitutional unbridled discretion under the current rules.

Sunday, June 06, 2021

Church's Suit On COVID Limits Dismissed As Moot

In Calvary Chapel of Bangor v. Mills, (D ME, June 4, 2021), a Maine federal district court dismissed on mootness grounds a church's challenge to Maine Governor Janet Mills now-superseded COVID-19 limits on the number of people permitted to attend worship services. The court said in part:

Governor Mills has not employed a strategy of “moving the goalposts.” The fact that she retains some authority to reimpose restrictions does not mean that she is likely to do so, particularly given her counsel’s statements and her actions thus far. I conclude that the Defendant has demonstrated that it is absolutely clear that Governor Mills cannot reasonably be expected to reinstate the GATHERING ORDERS that are identified in the Complaint.

Previously the court had denied a temporary restraining order, and an appeal of that decision is currently pending in the U.S. Supreme court. Nevertheless, last week's decision was immediately appealed to the U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals. Liberty Counsel issued a press release on the case.

Court Refuses To Allow Chabad To File Amended RLUIPA Complaint

In Friends of Lubavitch v. Baltimore County, Maryland,(D MD, June 3, 2021), a Maryland federal district court found no RLUIPA or other violations in denying a motion to file an amended complaint and a motion for reconsideration.  At issue was an earlier decision that dismissed a suit in which a Chabad House serving students at Towson University and Goucher College challenged a state court order requiring it to raze the expansion of its building which was constructed in violation of zoning rules and a deed restriction.

Friday, June 04, 2021

Justice Gorsuch Denies "Shadow Docket" Injunction Pending Appeal Sought By Two Churches

In a little-noticed order on the Supreme Court's "shadow docket", earlier this week Justice Gorsuch, without referring the petition to the entire Court, denied an emergency application for an injunction pending appeal filed by two churches who oppose Colorado's COVID-19 executive orders and public health orders. In Denver Bible Church v. Polis, (US Sup. Ct., application denied 6/1/2021), the churches sought an injunction while appeals are pending to prohibit the state from issuing future disaster emergency or public health orders against houses of worship and from enforcing against them any current orders issued since the beginning of the COVID pandemic. (Full text of application and brief in support). SCOTUSblog has more on the action. Here are links to other filings in the case.

Catholic Group Challenges Zoning Refusal To Allow Building Of Chapel

Suit was filed this week in a Michigan federal district court challenging Genoa Township's refusal to allow a Catholic religious organization to develop and construct a 95-seat Chapel and prayer campus on land it acquired from the Diocese of Lansing in 2020. The Township has also demanded that all religious signage already on the property be removed. The complaint (full text) in Catholic Healthcare International, Inc. v. Genoa Charter Township, (ED MI, filed 6/2/2021), alleges that the Township's actions violate plaintiff's rights under RLUIPA, the Michigan Constitution and the First and 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. American Freedom Law Center issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

Thursday, June 03, 2021

Suspended Teacher Who Opposed Policy On Transgender Students Sues

Suit was filed this week in a Virginia state trial court seeking a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to require the Loudon County School Board to reinstate Bryon Cross, a teacher who was suspended for comments he made at a public school board meeting. The Motion and Memorandum in Support (full text) in Cross v. Loudon County School Board, (VA Cir. Ct., filed 6/1/2021) contend that Cross' free speech and free exercise rights were violated when he was placed on administrative leave for opposing a proposed policy that would require teachers to address students using the student's preferred pronoun. At the school board meeting, Cross said in part:

I'm a teacher but I serve God first. And I will not affirm that a biological boy can be a girl and vice versa because it is against my religion. It's lying to a child. It's abuse to a child. And it's sinning against our God.

ADF issued a press release announcing the filing of the law suit.

Ministerial Exception Leads To Dismissal Of Part of Nuns' Sexual Harassment Claims

In Brandenburg v. Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North America, (SD NY, June 1, 2021), two nuns who formerly worked at a Greek Orthodox monastery sued the Archdiocese and several clergy members for sexual harassment by Father Makris at the monastery. One of the plaintiffs also sued over the conduct of Father Makris when he was Dean of Students at the religious college she attended in Massachusetts. When the student reported a sexual assault by a male student, Makris made her marry her attacker to cure the assault.

Invoking the ministerial exception doctrine, the court dismissed plaintiffs' sex discrimination claims and their retaliation claims to the extent they are based on tangible employment action (hiring, firing, job assignments, promotion, compensation).  However the court held that the claims for constructive discharge survive, as do the claims for retaliation to the extent they are based on harassment and not a tangible employment action. Some of plaintiffs' defamation claims also survived the motion to dismiss.

Challenges To Alabama COVID-19 Orders Are Unsuccessful

In Case v. Ivey, MD AL, June 1, 2021), six plaintiffs brought a range of constitutional challenges to Alabama Governor Kay Ivey's COVID-19 Orders. In a 68-page opinion, the court dismissed all of them-- some on standing or mootness grounds, others on substantive or qualified immunity grounds. Among the claims, one plaintiff contended that the Orders denied her the right to attend the church of her choice. Two pastors claimed that the Orders resulted in the denial of their right to preach and conduct in-person services. The court concluded that defendants had qualified immunity as to the damage claims against them for violating the First Amendment's Free Exercise, Freedom of Assembly and Establishment Clauses because plaintiffs did not plausibly allege that defendants’ conduct violated law that was clearly established at the time of their actions.

Court Says Wayne State Also Violated State Constitution and 14th Amendment In Denying Recognition To Christian Group

In Intervarsity Christian Fellowship/USA v. Board of Governors of Wayne State University, (ED MI, June 1, 2021), a Michigan federal district court denied defendants' motion for reconsideration of the breadth of an injunction the court issued in April which prohibits Defendants from revoking the recognized student organization status of IVCF. (See prior posting.) Wayne State had claimed that IVCF violated the school's non-discrimination policy by insisting that its leaders agree with IVCF's  “Doctrine and Purpose Statements,” “exemplify Christ-like character, conduct and leadership,” and describe their Christian beliefs. The court's April decision found violations of the 1st Amendment. The current decision concludes that the school also violated the free speech provision of the Michigan Constitution and the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.


Wednesday, June 02, 2021

2nd Circuit: Vermont Town Tuition Program Cannot Exclude Parochial Schools

 In A.H. v. French, (2d Cir., June 2, 2021), the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals filed its opinion explaining its Feb. 3, 2021 Order granting a petition for a writ of mandamus.  At issue was Vermont's refusal to allow students attending religious schools to participate in the state's Town Tuition Program. School districts that do not operate their own high schools must pay tuition costs for students in their district to attend another public high school or an approved non-religious private high school. The Second Circuit held that the exclusion of religious high schools from the program violates the First Amendment, saying in part:

Four years ago, the Supreme Court reminded states that it “has repeatedly confirmed that denying a generally available benefit solely on account of religious identity imposes a penalty on the free exercise of religion that can be justified only by a state interest of the highest order.” Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer.... Last June, the Court clarified that this rule does not allow a state to apply a state constitutional prohibition on aid to religion that would “bar[] religious schools from public benefits solely because of the religious character of the schools.” Espinoza v. Mont. Dep't of Revenue.... The Court emphasized that “[s]tatus-based discrimination remains status based even if one of its goals or effects is preventing religious organizations from putting aid to religious uses”....

Judge Menashi filed a concurring opinion.

NOTE TO READERS USING FEEDBURNER E-MAIL SERVICE

Google, the sponsor of Feedburner, has announced that the Feedburner e-mail service will no longer be available after July 2021. If you are currently following Religion Clause through a daily e-mail from Feedburner-- the address you receive it from is feedproxy@google.com-- you may wish to select an alternative platform for following this blog. You can subscribe to alternative e-mail feeds through "Follow.it" or "FeedBlitz".  Just scroll down near the bottom of the Sidebar of the blog to subscribe to one of these.

Florida Governor Signs Law Barring Transgender Women From Women's High School and College Teams

Yesterday Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed SB 1028 (full text) into law. (Press release from Governor.) Section 12 of the law enacts the "Fairness in Women's Sports Act" which bans transgender women from competing on women's sports teams sponsored by public high schools or colleges. The Act provides in part:

(b) Athletic teams or sports designated for males, men, or boys may be open to students of the female sex.

(c) Athletic teams or sports designated for females, women, or girls may not be open to students of the male sex.

(d) For purposes of this section, a statement of a student’s biological sex on the student’s official birth certificate is considered to have correctly stated the student’s biological sex at birth if the statement was filed at or near the time of the student’s birth.

The Act gives a civil cause of action to students or schools injured by a violation of the Act. 

Tuesday, June 01, 2021

Pope Francis Promulgates Revised Canon Law Criminal Code

Pope Francis today announced the promulgation of a  revised version of Book 6 of the Code of Canon Law-- Penal Sanctions in the Church (full text in English). AP reports on significant changes brought about by the revised Code:

The most significant changes are contained in two articles, 1395 and 1398, which aim to address shortcomings in the church’s handling of sexual abuse. The law recognizes that adults, not only children, can be victimized by priests who abuse their authority. The revisions also say that laypeople holding church positions, such as school principals or parish economists, can be punished for abusing minors as well as adults.

The Vatican also criminalized priests “grooming” minors or vulnerable adults to compel them to engage in pornography. The update represents the first time church law has officially recognized as a criminal act the method used by sexual predators to build relationships with victims they have targeted for sexual exploitation.

The new law, which is set to take effect on Dec. 8, also removes much of the discretion that long allowed bishops and religious superiors to ignore or cover up abuse, making clear those in positions of authority will be held responsible if they fail to properly investigate or sanction predator priests.

A bishop can be removed from office for “culpable negligence” or if he does not report sex crimes to church authorities, although the canon law foresees no punishment for failing to to report suspected crimes to police.

The President and the Secretary of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts spoke at a news conference announcing the revisions. (full text of their remarks in Latin). [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Monday, May 31, 2021

2nd Circuit Panel Grants Rehearing In New York Abortion Protest Case

As previously reported, in People of the State of New York v. Griepp, (ED NY, July 20, 2018), a New York federal district court, in a 103-page opinion, refused to grant the New York Attorney General a preliminary injunction against anti-abortion protesters who had been clashing with volunteer clinic escorts outside a Queens medical center.  The suit alleged that the protesters violated the federal Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACES), the New York Clinic Access Act (NYSCAA) and a similar New York City provision. On appeal, a 3-judge panel of the 2nd Circuit (March 10, 2021) (full text of opinions) in 3 opinions spanning 172 pages disagreed with most of the district court's conclusions. Now in an Order (full text) issued May 28, the panel vacated its opinion and granted a rehearing. The Order provides that in the meantime, the decision of the district court remains in place.

Recent Articles of Interest

 From SSRN:

From SmartCILP:

Sunday, May 30, 2021

Biden Issues Statement On Anti-Semitic Attacks

On Friday, President Biden issued a Statement (full text) on the Rise of Anti-Semitic Attacks. The Statement reads in part:

In the last weeks, our nation has seen a series of anti-Semitic attacks, targeting and terrorizing American Jews.... I will not allow our fellow Americans to be intimidated or attacked because of who they are or the faith they practice.

We cannot allow the toxic combination of hatred, dangerous lies, and conspiracy theories to put our fellow Americans at risk. As Attorney General Garland announced yesterday, the Department of Justice will be deploying all of the tools at its disposal to combat hate crimes.... We must all stand together to silence these terrible and terrifying echoes of the worst chapters in world history, and pledge to give hate no safe harbor.

Suit Challenges County's Limiting Jail Chaplain Position to Those With Christian Beliefs

Suit was filed last week in a Maryland federal district court by a Muslim volunteer jail chaplain challenging the requirements imposed by Prince Georges County, Maryland on applicants for a paid jail chaplain position. The complaint (full text) in Bridges v. Prince Georges County, Maryland, (D MD, filed 5/27/2021), alleges that provisions of the county's agreement with Prison Ministry of America violate the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses:

Defendant PG County illegally required all applicants to sign a so-called “Statement of Applicant’s Christian Faith.”

... [The Statement] requires applicants to affirm that they “believe in one God, Creator and Lord of the Universe, the co-eternal Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit,” that “Jesus Christ, God’s Son, was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, lived a sinless life, [and] died a substitutionary atoning death on the cross,” and that “the Bible is God’s authoritative and inspired Word…without error in all its teachings, including creation, history, its own origins, and salvation.”

CAIR issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit. AP has additional background on the lawsuit.

Friday, May 28, 2021

EEOC Adopts Resolution Condemning Antisemitism

The EEOC announced yesterday that it has unanimously adopted a Resolution (full text) condemning Antisemitism. The Resolution reads in part:

[T]he U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission condemns in the strongest possible terms the recent violence, harassment, and acts of bias against Jewish persons; expresses our heartfelt sympathy to and solidarity with victims and their families; and reaffirms our commitment to combat religious, ethnic, and national origin-based harassment and all other forms of unlawful discrimination and to ensure equal opportunity, inclusion, and dignity for all throughout America’s workplaces.

Church's Suit Against Bank Dismissed On Ecclesiastical Abstention Grounds

In Eglise Baptiste Bethanie De Ft. Lauderdale, Inc. v. Bank of America, N.A., (FL App., May 26, 2021), a Florida state appellate court, in a 2-1 decision, affirmed the dismissal of a suit by a Baptist church against a bank for negligently transferring control of the church's bank accounts to the widow of the deceased pastor. The court said in part:

Here, although the Church’s negligence claims against the Banks involve a question of control over bank accounts, in order to resolve those claims the court would necessarily have to decide which faction within the Church controls the bank accounts. The only way for the court to make this determination is for it to consider the Church’s internal governance structure. “[Q]uestions of church governance are manifestly ecclesiastical.” Id. Accordingly, the trial court did not err in dismissing the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction based on the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine.

Judge Winter dissented, saying in part:

Appellants argued that the case could be decided on neutral legal principles, and to determine otherwise goes beyond the four corners of the complaint. At best, therefore, dismissal was premature. The ecclesiastical abstention doctrine applies to church property disputes in hierarchical religious organizations. A different rule applies to churches which are congregational organizations. Based upon the correct rule, dismissal was error.

Thursday, May 27, 2021

Kristen Clark Sworn In To Head Justice Department Civil Rights Division

On Tuesday, the U.S. Senate, by a vote of 51-48, confirmed Kristen Clark as Assistant Attorney General to head the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division. She was sworn in Tuesday evening, making her the first woman, and the first Black woman, to hold this position. According to NBC News:

Her nomination was met with opposition from Republicans, who accused Clarke of antisemitism. The accusation stemmed from an incident in 1994 in which the Harvard Black Students Association, a group Clarke led at age 19, invited a professor accused of promoting antisemitic conspiracy theories to speak. Clarke defended the decision at the time in the Harvard Crimson, the school's student newspaper.

She acknowledged this past January that giving the professor a platform was a mistake, and touted her record on antisemitism in her civil rights work.

Biden Issues Greeting To Buddhists Celebrating Vesak

Yesterday President Biden issued a Statement (full text) sending warm wishes to Buddhists celebrating the festival of Vesak, saying in part:

The ceremonial lighting of a lamp, the symbol of this holiday that has been celebrated for over 2,500 years, reminds us of Buddhism’s teachings of compassion, humility, and selflessness that endure today. On this day, we also commemorate the many contributions of Buddhists in America....

Florida State Settles With Catholic Student Who Was Removed As Student Senate Head

As previously reported, last October a student court at the University of Florida concluded that the University's Student Senate violated the 1st Amendment when it removed Jack Denton, a Catholic student, from the Senate presidency. Student Senate took the action because Denton criticized Black Lives Matter, the ACLU and Reclaim the Block, saying they take views opposed to Catholic teachings. Now, the University has entered a settlement agreement (full text) with Denton under which the University has agreed to pay Denton $10,000 in damages and $1050 in back pay that he would have earned if he had remained Senate president. It will also pay Denton's attorney fees of $83,950. ADF, which represented Denton, issued a press release announcing the settlement.

Kosher Restaurant Sues Certifying Agency For Defamation

New York Post reported this week on a lawsuit filed last month in a state trial court in Nassau County, New York by a kosher restaurant against the local kosher certifying agency that the restaurant used to hire. Last July, the restaurant, Chimichurri Charcoal Chicken, as well as two other establishments, switched from Vaad Hakashrus of the Five Towns and Far Rockaway to a rival, less expensive, certifying agency called Mehadrin of the Five Towns. This led the Vaad to issue a statement, alleged to be defamatory, criticizing Chimichurri's kosher food standards and urging residents not to eat there. The restaurant's lawsuit alleges:

The existing Vaad does not want competition, is afraid of the competition, and is trying to use its power to drive them — or attempt to drive them — out of business.

Chimichurri initially attempted to resolve the dispute in a rabbinical court, but the rabbis who head the Vaad did not show up for the hearing. This led the rabbinical court to grant unusual permission for Chimichurri to sue in secular court. The Vaad's lawyer told the New York Post:

Rabbis have an obligation and a right under the First Amendment to guide their communities with respect to religious issues and this does constitute a religious issue.

The Vaad has said that it has legitimate concerns about conflicts of interest.

Wednesday, May 26, 2021

Street Artist Sues Vatican For Using Her Image of Christ On Postage Stamp

 AP reports on a lawsuit filed in Italy last month by a Rome street artist.  Alessia Babrow has sued the Vatican for copyright infringement for using her street art image of Christ on the Vatican's 2020 Easter postage stamp.  The image was glued onto a bridge near the Vatican:

Olivieri, the Vatican’s numismatic chief, has told an Italian journalist that he took a photo of the Christ when he saw it while riding his moped one day and decided to use the image for the Easter stamp in an apparent attempt to appeal to a new generation of stamp enthusiasts.

9th Circuit Rejects Qualified Immunity For Denying NOI Inmate Participation In Ramadan

In Obataiye-Allah v. Steward, (9th Cir., May 25, 2021), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals vacated an Oregon federal district court's holding that prison officials were shielded from damages by qualified immunity in a Nation of Islam inmate's suit complaining that he was denied participation in Ramadan in 2018. The court said in part:

Plaintiff’s declaration established that he has a sincerely held Nation of Islam religious belief and he informed defendants that weekly prayer meetings were not required for Nation of Islam Muslims. The right to free exercise was clearly established in 2018, such that a reasonable official would have known that requiring attendance at weekly prayer meetings as a condition to participate in Ramadan, without consideration of other alternatives to establish sincerity of belief, would violate the First Amendment.

The court also vacated the district court's rejection of plaintiff's equal protection "class of one" claim. 

Building Code Is Not Zoning Law Under RLUIPA

In St. Paul’s Foundation and Shrine of Saint Nicholas the Wonder Worker, Patron of Sailors, Brewers and Repentant Thieves v. Baldacci, (D MA, May 21, 2021), a Massachusetts federal district court held that revocation of a building permit to assure compliance with the state building code is not covered by RLUIPA.  Plaintiff, a monastery, sought to renovate a building to provide a space to brew beer, a chapel and and a fellowship hall.  The court concluded that a building code is not a land use regulation or zoning law. Moreover, there was no substantial burden on religious exercise.

Tuesday, May 25, 2021

Georgia Anti-BDS Law Held Unconstitutional

 In Martin v. Wrigley, (ND GA, May 21, 2021), a Georgia federal district court held that Georgia's anti-Israel boycott law violates contractors' free speech rights and is unconstitutionally vague. The law requires that all state contracts contain a certification that the contractor is not engaged engaged in a boycott of Israel. It was challenged by a pro-Palestinian journalist who had been invited to speak at a conference at a state university. The court said in part:

Because the burden on speech imposed by O.C.G.A. § 50-5-85 is content based, it is subject to strict scrutiny....  Even assuming that Georgia's interest in furthering foreign policy goals regarding relations with Israel is a substantial state interest, Defendants fail to explain how Martin's advocacy of a boycott of Israel as any bearing on Georgia's ability to advance foreign policy goals with Israel. The law also is not narrowly tailored to achieve the state's purported interest....

The requirement contained in O.C.G.A. § 50-5-85 that parties seeking to contract with the state of Georgia sign a certification that they are not engaged in a boycott of Israel also is unconstitutional compelled speech.

CAIR issued a press release announcing the decision.

Canadian Supreme Court Refuses To Invalidate Archbishop's Expulsion of Church Members

In Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church of Canada St. Mary Cathedral v. Aga, (Sup Ct Canada, May 21, 2021), the Supreme Court of Canada refused to invalidate an Archbishop's expulsion of five church members. The expelled members had been critical of the Archbishop's refusal to accept a recommendation of a committee investigating a movement which some saw as heretical. The members argued that their expulsions violated principles of natural justice because they had no opportunity to hear or contest the charges against them. The court held, however, that "there is no free‑standing right to procedural fairness with respect to decisions taken by voluntary associations." The court explained its decision:

Jurisdiction to intervene in the affairs of a voluntary association depends on the existence of a legal right which the court is asked to vindicate. Here, the only viable candidate for a legal right justifying judicial intervention is contract. The finding of a contract between members of a voluntary association does not automatically follow from the existence of a written constitution and bylaws. Voluntary associations with constitutions and bylaws may be constituted by contract, but this is a determination that must be made on the basis of general contract principles, and objective intention to enter into legal relations is required. In this case, evidence of an objective intention to enter into legal relations is missing. As such, there is no contract, there is no jurisdiction, and there is no genuine issue requiring a trial.

Canadian law however does permit courts to intervene in religious decisions more readily than America courts are willing to do, as illustrated by this summary by the Court:

[W]hile purely theological issues are not justiciable ..., where a legal right is at issue, courts may need to consider questions that have a religious aspect in vindicating the legal right.... For example, courts adjudicating disputes over church property may need to consider adherence to the church’s internal rules, even where those rules are meant to give effect to religious commitments.  

Law Times reports on the decision.

Monday, May 24, 2021

Opening Of Court Sessions With Prayer Violates Establishment Clause

In Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Mack, (SD TX, May 21, 2021), a Texas federal district court held that a program devised by a Justice of the Peace under which his court sessions are opened with a prayer from a volunteer chaplain violates the Establishment Clause. The court concluded that attendees are impermissibly coerced into participating in religious ritual. It said in part:

The structure of the ceremony, combined with the defendant’s attendant statements about the ceremony’s purpose, is designed to give attendees “a sense of being in the presence of something . . . holy and sacred[.]” ... The Court is of the view that the defendant violates the Establishment Clause when, before a captured audience of litigants and their counsel, he presents himself as theopneustically-inspired, enabling him to advance, through the Chaplaincy Program, God’s “larger purpose.” Such a magnanimous goal flies in the face of historical tradition, and makes a mockery of both, religion and law.

FFRF issued a press release announcing the decision. First Liberty Institute which represents defendant says that it will appeal the decision to the 5th Circuit.

Another Church Seeks Emergency Injunction Against COVID Limits From Supreme Court

Last Friday, a Maine church filed a motion with the U.S. Supreme Court seeking an injunction while its petition for certiorari is pending to prevent Maine from enforcing its COVID-19 capacity restrictions on worship services. The petition (full text) in Calvary Chapel of Bangor v. Mills, (Sup. Ct. filed 5/21/2021), says in part:

For 381 days, Respondent Governor Janet Mills ... has been imposing unconstitutional restrictions on Calvary Chapel’s religious worship services while exempting myriad other activities from similar restrictions. Every religious worship gathering of Calvary Chapel from March 2020, to the present has been and is “illegal” under the Governor’s Orders. Maine imposes the most severe restrictions in the country on churches and places of worship.

Liberty Counsel issued a press release announcing the filing of the motion. 

Iowa Supreme Court Dismisses Fiduciary and Defamation Claims Against Church and Pastors

In Koster v. Harvest Bible Chapel- Quad Cities,(IA Sup. Ct., May 21, 2021), the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of a suit against a church and three of its pastors by a congregant who alleged defamation and breach of fiduciary duty. The court summarized the facts:

Two members of a church went through a fractious divorce. One member alleged that the other member had abused their children, allegations that turned out to be groundless. Their pastor, however, believed the allegations and sent emails to fellow pastors, church staff, and a discipleship group. The emails repeated the allegations to some extent, while also expressing support for the member making the allegations. After the allegations were discredited, the member who had been victimized by the allegations sued the pastor and the church on several tort theories....

We find that the plaintiff’s breach of fiduciary duty claim cannot go forward because it would require consideration of the church’s doctrine and religious practices. We also find that the plaintiff’s defamation claim is subject to a qualified privilege and that plaintiff has not overcome that privilege with evidence of actual malice.

Recent Articles of Interest

 From SSRN:

From SmartCILP:

Sunday, May 23, 2021

European Court Says That Bulgaria Should Have Recognized Break-Away Orthodox Churches

In a case decided last month, Bulgarian Orthodox Old Calendar Church v. Bulgaria, (ECHR, April 21, 2021), the European Court of Human Rights, in a Chamber Judgment, held that Bulgaria had violated Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights when it refused to register a church adhering to the Old Calendarist variant of Eastern Orthodoxy.  Bulgarian courts relied on a provision in the Religious Denominations Act of 2002 providing that persons who had seceded from a registered religious institution before the Act’s entry into force in breach of that institution’s internal rules could not use the name of that institution. The European Court said in part:

62. Requiring a religious organisation seeking registration to take on a name which is not liable to mislead believers and the general public ... can in principle be seen as a justified limitation on its right freely to choose its name.... But the names of the applicant church and of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church were not identical, the applicant church’s name being sufficiently distinguished by the words “Old Calendar”. It is well known that Old Calendarist churches, which first appeared in the 1920s, when some Eastern Orthodox churches switched from the Julian Calendar to the Revised Julian Calendar, are distinct from those Eastern Orthodox churches.... Moreover, nothing suggests that the applicant church wished to identify itself with the Bulgarian Orthodox Church....

63.  In so far as the Government argued that the overlap between the beliefs and practices of the applicant church and of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church was also a bar to the applicant church’s registration...- it should be noted that the assessment of whether or not religious beliefs are identical is not a matter for the State authorities, but for the religious communities themselves....  Pluralism, which is the basic fabric of democracy, is incompatible with State action compelling a religious community to unite under a single leadership.... 

64.  The refusal to register the applicant church was therefore not “necessary in a democratic society”. It follows that there has been a breach of Article 9 of the Convention read in the light of Article 11.

Law & Religion UK has more on the decision.

In a second case decided the same day, Independent Orthodox Church v. Bulgaria, (ECHR April 21, 2021), the same section of the European Court held that Bulgaria violated Article 9 of the Convention when it refused to recognize a new church because its name and beliefs were the same as those of the existing Bulgarian Orthodox Church. The Court commented:

[T]he State does not need to ensure that religious communities remain under a unified leadership.... Even if the creation of the applicant church was ... prompted by a division within the Bulgarian Orthodox Church, this fact does not alter that.... Nor does the fact that the Bulgarian Orthodox Church’s unity is considered of the utmost importance for its adherents and for Bulgarian society in general.

Suit Against Chicago Schools Over Transcendental Meditation Program Can Move Ahead In Part

In Separation of Hinduism from Our Schools v. Chicago Public Schools, (ND IL, May 21, 2021), plaintiffs challenged Chicago Public Schools' "Quiet Time" program which was led by a Transcendental Meditation instructor. They claim that the sessions contained elements of Hinduism in them. The court dismissed claims of some of the plaintiffs for lack of standing, and dismissed claims against the private foundation and the University of Chicago which helped implement the program. One of the plaintiffs, a former student who was required to participate in the program, was found to have standing to bring Establishment and Free Exercise clause claims as well as a claim under the Illinois Religious Freedom Restoration Act against the Chicago public schools. His father also had standing on 1st Amendment claims arising before his son's 18th birthday. The court said in part:

[E]ven if the Williamses were seeking only nominal damages, they would have standing to sue. In a case decided after the parties' briefs were submitted, the Supreme Court held that "a request for nominal damages satisfies the redressability element of standing where a plaintiff's claim is based on a completed violation of a legal right." Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski, 141 S. Ct. 792, 802 (2021).

Friday, May 21, 2021

Court Denies Injunction Against HUD's Fair Housing Act Interpretation Of Sex Discrimination

According to the Springfield News-Leader, after a 2½-hour hearing on Wednesday, a Missouri federal district court judge refused to issue a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction against enforcement of a Department of Housing and Urban Development Directive interpreting the Fair Housing Act as barring discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. The challenge was brought by College of the Ozarks, a Christian college that objects to housing transgender females in women's dormitories. (See prior posting.) The judge said that enjoining HUD would not protect the school from liability in a suit by a student who alleges  discrimination.

Suit On Misrepresentations In Settling Clergy Sex Abuse Claims Is Dismissed

 In Caldwell v. Archdiocese of New York, (SD NY, May 19, 2021), individuals who released their childhood sexual abuse claims as part of the Archdiocese's ’ Independent Reconciliation and Compensation Programs brought a class action claiming misrepresentations in procuring the releases. They claimed misrepresentations regarding the fairness of the settlements, the independence of the plan administrators, as well as failure to advise claimants of the prospects for enactment of the New York Child Victims Act.  The court dismissed the claims because plaintiffs failed to plead them with particularity as required by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 9(b).  They also failed to show a special relationship that would give rise to a duty to disclose information about the Child Victims Act and failed to show that they were induced to refrain from carrying out their own investigation.

Defamation Action By Bishop In Russian Orthodox Church Survives Motion To Dismiss

In Belya v. Metropolitan Hilarion, (SD NY, May 19, 2021), a New York federal district court refused to dismiss a defamation complaint by a leader of the Russian Orthodox Christian Church in the United States against various other Church leaders who oppose plaintiff's election as Bishop of Miami. According to the court, defendants, in a letter to the church's Synod, made various allegations:

Principally, the letter alleges that the election of Belya never actually occurred; that the results of Belya’s election were fabricated; that the communications from Hilarion to Russia were falsified, either with Hilarion’s knowledge or without; and that the letter from Archbishop Gavriil confirming that Belya had instituted the required changes of practice was likewise falsified. The Olkhovskiy Group requested, in light these allegations and additional unspecified complaints from persons in Florida, that Belya be suspended from clerical functions until the completion of a full investigation. This letter was disseminated among the members of the New York Synod, to parishes, churches, monasteries, and other institutions within ROCOR, as well as more broadly to online media outlets. 

According to Belya, after the September 3 Letter was sent, he was denied all access to Hilarion and was suspended from performing his duties as spiritual leader of his parish....

Rejecting an ecclesiastical abstention argument, the court concluded that the lawsuit "may be resolved by appealing to neutral principles of law. Plaintiff’s claim centers on Defendants’ allegations that he forged the various letters at issue that led to the confirmation of his election as Bishop of Miami."  The court went on:

Belya does not ask this Court to determine whether his election was proper or whether he should be reinstated to his role as Bishop of Miami, and the Court would not consider such a request under the doctrine of ecclesiastical abstention....

Defendants argued that the statements at issue could not be defamatory because they were merely allegations or opinions.  The court concluded, however, that at least one of the challenged statements were assertions of fact, not just allegations.

President Signs COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act

Yesterday, President Biden signed into law S.937, COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act. (full text). While the impetus for the bill was the increase in hate crimes against Asian-Americans and Pacific Islanders, the Act's provisions ramp up enforcement efforts relating to a broader group of hate crimes, including crimes committed because of the victim's religion. Among the Act's provisions are the following:

(1) Expedited review of hate crimes by the Justice Department during the next year.

(2) Justice Department must issue new guidance to states and localities on how to create online reporting of hate crimes and expand public education campaigns.

(3) Grants to states and local governments to assist in reporting of hate crimes to the National Incident-Based Reporting System.

(4) Grants for state-run Hate-Crime Hot Lines.

(5) Grants for law enforcement activities or crime reduction programs to respond to hate crimes.

(6) Justice Department must provide an annual report to Congress on the incidence of hate crimes.

(7) New provision on sentencing for hate crimes. If court imposes a term of supervised release after imprisonment, the court may order defendant to take classes or provide community service directly related to the community harmed by the defendant's offense.

Thursday, May 20, 2021

NOTE TO READERS USING FEEDBURNER E-MAIL SERVICE

Google, the sponsor of Feedburner, has announced that the Feedburner e-mail service will no longer be available after July 2021. If you are currently following Religion Clause through a daily e-mail from feedproxy@google.com, you may wish to select an alternative platform for following this blog. You can find alternatives near the bottom of the Sidebar of the blog. This does not affect those who access Religion Clause in other ways (including FeedBlitz).

Virginia Muslim Politician Sues Over Lynching Threat

 A civil damage action for racial, religious and ethnic harassment in violation of Virginia Code § 8.01-42.1 was filed yesterday in federal district court by Qasim Rashid, a Virginia politician who is an Ahmadiyya Muslim and human rights activist.  Rashid sued Joseph Vandevere who used anonymous social media accounts to make violent threats, including the threat of lynching, against Rashid. The complaint (full text) in Rashid v. Vandevere, (ED VA, filed 5/19/2021), also alleges intentional infliction of emotional distress. In June 2020, Vandevere was sentenced in a criminal case to ten months in prison for making threats against Rashid. Muslim Advocates issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

ISIS Supporter Pleads Guilty To Planning Ohio Synagogue Attack

The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Ohio announced that yesterday Damon M. Joseph, aka Abdullah Ali Yusuf, pleaded guilty today to attempting to commit a hate crime by planning an ISIS-inspired attack on a synagogue in the Toledo, Ohio area. He also pleaded guilty to providing material support to ISIS and the Islamic State of Iraq. According to the Cleveland Jewish News, a preliminary plea agreement provides for a 20-year prison sentence for Joseph.

6th Circuit Rejects Free Exercise Challenge To Corporal Punishment Limitations

In Clark v. Stone, (6th Cir., May 19, 2021), the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a challenge by fundamentalist Christian parents that a child abuse investigation infringed their free exercise and due process rights. The parents believe that their religion requires them to use corporal punishment when necessary upon their children. The investigation led to a Juvenile Court order prohibiting the parents from physically disciplining their children. The court said in part:

While we can state with ease that there is a general right to use reasonable corporal punishment at home and in schools, that right is not an unlimited one. The Clarks have offered no authority that imposing corporal punishment that leaves marks is reasonable and is therefore a protected right....

... [A]lthough targeting religious beliefs is never acceptable, a generally applicable law that incidentally burdens one’s free exercise rights will typically be upheld....

Furthermore, any challenge to this regulation would likely survive strict scrutiny.... Here, the state certainly has a compelling interest in protecting children from physical abuse, and the regulation is written such that it explicitly does not prohibit corporal punishment that does not leave marks, bruises, etc. Thus, the regulation is narrowly tailored....

9th Circuit: Denial of Invocation Spot To Satanic Temple Was OK

 In The Satanic Temple, Inc. v. City of Scottsdale, (9th Cir., May 19, 2021), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed an Arizona federal district court's dismissal of a religious discrimination suit by The Satanic Temple.  TST sued after it was not permitted to give a religious invocation at a city council meeting.  The district court concluded that the decision was based on a policy that only allowed organizations with substantial ties to the city to deliver invocations. According to the Court of Appeals:

After weighing the credibility of the witnesses, the district court properly concluded that TST had failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that TST’s religious beliefs were a factor, let alone a substantial motivating factor, in Biesemeyer’s decision not to approve TST to give a legislative prayer.

Friendly Atheist blog discusses the case.

Wednesday, May 19, 2021

County's Current COVID Restrictions Upheld

In Abundant Life Baptist Church of Lee's Summit, Missouri v. Jackson County, Missouri(WD MO, May 17, 2021), a Missouri federal district court held that free exercise, free speech, freedom of assembly and Establishment Clause challenges to prior versions of Jackson County's COVID-19 restrictions should not be dismissed. However challenges to the current version of the restrictions were dismissed because the restrictions do not distinguish between churches and other businesses or indoor spaces.

Suspended Priest's Age Discrimination Claim Dismissed Under Ecclesiastical Abstention Doctrine

In In re Roman Catholic Diocese of El Paso, (TX App., May 17, 2021), a Texas appellate court by a vote of 2-1 held that under the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine, Texas civil courts lack jurisdiction over an age discrimination and fraud case brought by a Catholic priest against his diocese.  The suit was brought when the diocese reduced payments being made to the priest who was placed on administrative leave after criminal allegations were lodged against him. The majority said in part:

The Diocese contends in this mandamus that a civil court cannot adjudicate whether Bishop Seitz exercised his discretion to reduce Olivas’s payment of decent support in a reasonable manner without inextricably involving itself in the governance of the Catholic Church. We agree and conclude that for both of the asserted claims in this case, that the fact finder would have to judge the stated rationale of Bishop Seitz’s reduction of payments which is grounded under the church’s canon law.

Chief Justice Rodriguez dissented on several grounds. He said in part:

I believe that employment discrimination laws such as the age discrimination provision of Texas Commission on Human Rights Act ... may be constitutionally enforced against religious entity employers, provided that the employee bringing the claim is not one of the defendant’s “ministers.”...

[T]he wrinkle in this case is that while Olivas retains the title of priest, he is by the Church’s own assessment a priest in name only. Seitz admitted that Olivas does not and cannot perform any ministerial duties for the Diocese due to Olivas’ suspension of faculties.

Tuesday, May 18, 2021

Supreme Court Dismisses Cert. Grants On Title X Rule As HHS Considers Repeal

As previously reported, in February the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in three related cases challenging a Trump Administration rule promulgated by the Department of Health and Human Services in March 2019. Among other things, the rule imposes new restrictions on abortion referrals by health care providers receiving Title X family planning funds. It effect was to cut off millions of federal dollars to Planned Parenthood. In April, however, the Biden Administration issued a proposed rule that would reverse the Trump Administration change in policy. (See prior posting.) In light of that, and the Government's assurance that it will continue to enforce the Trump Administration rules until they are changed (except in Maryland where an injunction is in force), the Supreme Court yesterday, by a vote of 6-3, dismissed the certiorari petitions. (American Medical Association v. Becerra, Docket No. 20-429, Becerra v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, Docket No. 20-454, Oregon v. Becerra, Docket No. 20-539, cert. dismissed 5/17/2021) (Order List.) Justices Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch would not have dismissed the petitions. SCOTUSblog reports on the Court's action.

Supreme Court Grants Review In Mississippi Abortion Ban Case

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court granted review in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Center, (Docket No. 19-2392, certiorari granted 5/17/2021). (Order List). In the case, the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a Mississippi statute that prohibits abortions, with limited exceptions, after 15 weeks' gestational age. The Supreme Court limited its grant of review to Question 1 presented in the petition for certiorari:

Whether all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional.

Here is the SCOTUSblog case page with all the filings in the case. NPR reports on the Court's grant of review.

Sunday, May 16, 2021

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

From SmartCILP:

Friday, May 14, 2021

Texas Passes Heartbeat Abortion Law With Broad Civil Enforcement Provision

Today the Texas legislature sent to Governor Greg Abbott for his signature SB8 (full text), the state's version of a "heartbeat" abortion law. Except in medical emergencies, it bans performing or inducing an abortion if the physician has detected a fetal heartbeat. Unique to the Texas law is a provision that allows any private person to bring a civil action against a physician who has violated the statute, and against anyone who knowingly aids or abets the abortion, including reimbursing the costs of an abortion through insurance, regardless of whether the person knew or should have known that the abortion would be performed or induced in violation of the statute. However, no action may be brought against the woman on whom the abortion was performed. Plaintiff may recover statutory damages of not less than $10,000 for each abortion the defendant has been involved in. Daily Beast reports on the new statute. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Biden Sends Greetings To Muslims Celebrating the Eid al-Fitr

 In a Facebook post yesterday, President Joe Biden said:

As the holy month of Ramadan comes to an end, Jill and I send our warmest greetings to all those celebrating Eid. May you be well throughout the year. Eid Mubarak.

Hawaii Mask Mandate Did Not Violate Protester's Free Exercise Rights

 In Denis v. Ige, (D HI, May 12, 2021), a Hawaii federal district court rejected challenges to Hawaii's COVID-19 mask requirements. Plaintiff, who was arrested at a protest for failing to wear a mask, asked for $632 million in damages.  Among other challenges, he asserts that his free exercise rights were violated:

He appears to contend that because the Mask Mandates “infringe[] upon [his] right to breathe oxygen without restriction,” which is “in violation [of his] covenant with his Creator of many names,” the Mask Mandates inhibit his religious practices.

The court concluded that plaintiff failed to allege that the mask mandate imposed a substantial burden on his practice of religion, and the mandate survives rational basis review. The court also rejected other claims, including free speech and freedom of association claims.

Thursday, May 13, 2021

State Department Releases 2020 International Religious Freedom Report

 Secretary of State Anthony Blinken yesterday announced release of the 2020 International Religious Freedom Report. The report surveys the status of religious freedom in virtually every foreign nation. In his remarks, Secretary Blinken said in part:

To name just a few examples from this year’s report, Iran continues to intimidate, harass, and arrest members of minority faith groups, including Baha’i, Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Sunni and Sufi Muslims.

In Burma, the military coup leaders are among those responsible for ethnic cleansing and other atrocities against Rohingya, most of whom are Muslim, and other religious and ethnic minorities around the world.

In Russia, authorities continue to harass, detain, and seize property of Jehovah’s Witnesses as well as members of Muslim minority groups on the pretense of alleged extremism.

In Nigeria, courts continue to convict people of blasphemy, sentencing them to long-term imprisonment or even death.  Yet the government has still not brought anyone to justice for the military’s massacre of hundreds of Shia Muslims in 2015.

Saudi Arabia remains the only country in the world without a Christian church, though there are more than a million Christians living in Saudi Arabia.  And authorities continue to jail human rights activists like Raif Badawi, who was sentenced in 2014 to a decade in prison and a thousand lashes for speaking about his beliefs.

And China broadly criminalizes religious expression and continues to commit crimes against humanity and genocide against Muslim Uyghurs and members of other religious and ethnic minority groups.

Today, I’m announcing the designation of Yu Hui, former office director of the so-called Central Leading Group Preventing and Dealing with Heretical Religions, of Chengdu, for his involvement in gross violations of human rights, namely, the arbitrary detention of Falun Gong practitioners.  Yu Hui and his family are now ineligible for entry into the United States.

10th Circuit Hears Oral Arguments In Ministerial Exception Case

On Tuesday, the U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments (audio of full arguments) in Tucker v. Faith Bible Chapel International.  In the case, a Colorado federal district court refused to dismiss on the pleadings a ministerial exception case. At issue is whether a science teacher and chaplain/ director of student life at Faith Christian Academy is a "minister" for purposes of the exception.  Plaintiff  was fired after he organized a controversial chapel service titled "Race and Faith." Reuters has additional background on the oral arguments.

Court Wil Not Enjoin South Carolina "No Aid" Clause

In Bishop of Charleston v. Adams, (D SC, May 11, 2021), a South Carolina federal district court refused to grant a preliminary injunction in a suit challenging the constitutionality of the "no aid" clause in South Carolina's Constitution. That clause bars the use of public funds to benefit any religious or other private educational institution. Plaintiffs, which include a diocese representing 33 Catholic schools, sought access to federal CARES Act funds that had been directed to South Carolina. The court distinguished this case from the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Espinoza v. Montana Dep’t of Revenue which struck down Montana's "no aid" clause.  The court said in part:

[T]he Supreme Court struck down Montana’s no-aid provision precisely because it discriminated against religious schools but not other private schools, creating an implicit contrast with no-aid provisions like South Carolina’s that encompass both religious and private non-religious schools. Unlike the provision at issue in Espinoza, South Carolina’s no-aid provision prohibits the use of public funds for the direct benefit of religious and non-religious private schools alike. In other words, South Carolina’s provision discriminates along the private/public divide, not the religious/non-religious divide.

Wednesday, May 12, 2021

New Pew Survey On Jewish Americans Released

The Pew Research Center yesterday released a 248-page survey Jewish Americans in 2020. (Summary of Report) (Full text of Report). The report estimates the Jewish population in the United States to be 7.5 million. Its one-sentence summary of the detailed and extensive report is:

U.S. Jews are culturally engaged, increasingly diverse, politically polarized and worried about anti-Semitism.

Missouri AG Sues County Over COVID Restrictions

Missouri's Attorney General yesterday filed suit in state court against the St. Louis County Executive challenging the county's COVID-19 orders.  The complaint (full text) in State of Missouri ex. rel. Schmitt v. Page, (MO Cir. Ct., filed 5/11/2021), alleges, among other things, that the orders violate the state's Religious Freedom Restoration Act by requiring pre-approval of large religious gatherings and imposing capacity limits and  masking requirements. The Attorney General issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit. AP reports on the lawsuit.

Summary Judgment Denied To Plaintiffs Challenging Refusal of High School Tournament To Accommodate Sabbath Observance

In Chung v. Washington Interscholastic Activities Association, (WD WA, May 10, 2021), five current and former high school students sued the state's Interscholastic Activities Association for failing to accommodate Seventh Day Adventists' Sabbath observance in scheduling and administering the high school state tennis championships. The court refused to grant plaintiffs' summary judgment on any of their claims. It found that four of the plaintiffs lacked standing since they had not yet reached the state championship tournament. As to the remaining plaintiff who had standing, the court held that material issues of fact remain on the question of whether her federal free exercise claim is subject to strict scrutiny. Analyzing her state free exercise claim, the court held that plaintiff failed to demonstrate a substantial burden on her religious exercise since she was merely denied the right to participate in post-season play in the sport of her choice.

Tuesday, May 11, 2021

Vatican Cautions U.S. Bishops Over Moves To Deny Communion To President Biden

AP reported last month that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is considering issuing a document that would call for denying Communion to public officials-- including President Joe Biden-- who support abortion rights. Now the Vatican has made its views on the process known.  According to yesterday's National Catholic Reporter:

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has urged the U.S. bishops to proceed with caution in their discussions about formulating a national policy "to address the situation of Catholics in public office who support legislation allowing abortion, euthanasia or other moral evils."...

In the letter to Archbishop José Gomez of Los Angeles, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, [Cardinal Luis] Ladaria also insisted: such a policy cannot usurp the authority of an individual bishop in his diocese on the matter; the policy would require near unanimity; and it would be "misleading" to present abortion and euthanasia as "the only grave matters of Catholic moral and social teaching that demand the fullest level of accountability on the part of Catholics."

The letter, dated May 7 and obtained by Catholic News Service in Rome, said it was in response to a letter from Gomez informing the doctrinal congregation that the bishops were preparing to address the situation of Catholic politicians and "the worthiness to receive holy Communion."...

HHS Says Affordable Care Act Bars LGBTQ Discrimination In Health Care

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services announced yesterday that its Office for Civil Rights will interpret the Affordable Care Act's anti-discrimination provisions as including discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. It said that this change from Trump Administration rules was made in light of the Supreme Court's recent Bostock decision. HHS also added that in enforcing these provisions, it will comply with the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and applicable court orders.

Church Sues Over Massachusetts COVID Regulations

Suit was filed yesterday in a Massachusetts federal district court by a church challenging the state's COVID-19 reopening regulations. The complaint (full text) in New Life South Coast Church v. Baker, (D MA, filed 5/10/2021), alleges in part:

Massachusetts’ phased COVID-19 reopening regulations, both as drafted by the Commonwealth and as implemented by the City, single out places of worship for differential and disfavored treatment. Under those regulations, restaurants, theaters, public transit, and other places of public gathering have limited or no restrictions on capacity, beyond the practical constraints of social distancing, while places of worship must follow more burdensome capacity restrictions. In addition, the regulations single out places of worship for special disfavor by barring “communal gatherings” before and after the religious service—a restriction that applies to no other institution or activity, and that purports to regulate how Massachusetts citizens may exercise religion.

First Liberty issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit. 

Monday, May 10, 2021

Archdiocese Sues For in-Person Access To Inmates

The Catholic Archdiocese of Milwaukee last week filed suit in state court against the Wisconsin Department of Corrections challenging its continued ban on volunteer clergy visiting prison inmates during the COVD crisis. The complaint (full text) in Archdiocese of Milwaukee v. Wisconsin Department of Corrections, (WI Cir. Ct., filed 6/7/2021),  alleges that the policy violates statutory provisions in Wisconsin on clergy access to prisons as well as the state constitution's protection of religious liberty. Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

UPDATE: The April 2021 issue of Journal of Law and Religion has recently been published. It includes a Symposium on Law, Religion, and Same-Sex Relations in Africa.

Sunday, May 09, 2021

Indiana Trial Court Dismisses Catholic School Teacher's Suit Against Archdiocese

As previously reported, in May 2020 in Payne-Elliott v. Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Indianapolis, Inc., an Indiana trial court refused to dismiss a lawsuit against the Catholic Archdiocese brought by a Catholic high school teacher who the Archdiocese ordered fired after he entered a same-sex marriage. In July 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court broadly interpreted the "ministerial exception" doctrine as it applies to teachers in religiously affiliated schools. Subsequently, in State of Indiana ex rel. Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Indianapolis, Inc. v. Marion Superior Court, (IN Sup. Ct., Dec. 10, 2020), the Indiana Supreme Court denied a writ of mandamus and prohibition and remanded the case to a different trial court judge "to consider new and pending issues and reconsider previous orders in the case."  Now, in Payne-Elliott v. Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Indianapolis, Inc.,  (IN Super. Ct., May 7, 2021), the trial court dismissed the case for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted. Legal Reader reports on the case.

11th Circuit: Juror Who Heard From Holy Spirit Should Not Have Been Removed

In United States v. Brown, (11th Cir., May 6, 2021), the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, sitting en banc, by a vote of 7-4 held that a district court judge abused his discretion in replacing a juror with an alternate in the trial of a former Florida Congresswoman who was convicted on most of the fraud, ethics and tax violation charges against her. The majority summarized:

This appeal requires us to decide whether a district judge abused his discretion by removing a juror who expressed, after the start of deliberations, that the Holy Spirit told him that the defendant, Corrine Brown, was not guilty on all charges. The juror also repeatedly assured the district judge that he was following the jury instructions and basing his decision on the evidence admitted at trial, and the district judge found him to be sincere and credible. But the district judge concluded that the juror’s statements about receiving divine guidance were categorically disqualifying. Because the record establishes a substantial possibility that the juror was rendering proper jury service, the district judge abused his discretion by dismissing the juror. The removal violated Brown’s right under the Sixth Amendment to a unanimous jury verdict. We vacate Brown’s convictions and sentence and remand for a new trial. 

Two concurring and two dissenting opinions were also filed. Judge Rosenbaum's dissent, joined by Judge Wilson and Martin, said in part:

Every judge of this Court agrees on this much: the same rule governs dismissal of both the juror who says his religious authority told him the defendant is not guilty on all charges and the one who says his religious authority told him the defendant is guilty on all charges. So let’s be clear about what we’re really doing today: we are holding that a district judge is powerless to dismiss a juror who, on a record like this one, says the Holy Spirit told him the defendant is guilty on all charges and he trusts the Holy Spirit—even though the judge finds after investigation that the juror is not capable of basing his guilty verdict on the evidence but instead will base his verdict on what he perceives to be a divine revelation.

A 3-judge panel of the 11th Circuit had affirmed the district court's decision. (See prior posting.) Politico reports on the en banc decision. 

Friday, May 07, 2021

Yesterday Was National Day of Prayer

A federal statute, 36 USC 169h, provides:

The President shall set aside and proclaim the first Thursday in May in each year as a National Day of Prayer, on which the people of the United States may turn to God in prayer and meditation at churches, in groups, and as individuals.

Yesterday was the first Thursday in May, and earlier this week President Biden issued a Proclamation (full text) announcing the day. It reads in part:

Today, we remember and celebrate the role that the healing balm of prayer can play in our lives and in the life of our Nation.  As we continue to confront the crises and challenges of our time — from a deadly pandemic, to the loss of lives and livelihoods in its wake, to a reckoning on racial justice, to the existential threat of climate change — Americans of faith can call upon the power of prayer to provide hope and uplift us for the work ahead.

UPDATE: The President's Proclamation has created some controversy. A Liberty Counsel press release says in part:

For the first time in 70 years, there was not a public prayer gathering at the U.S. Capitol Building yesterday during The National Day of Prayer, and Joe Biden made no mention of God in his proclamation.

Eviction of Church Did Not Violate RLUIPA

In Schworck v. City of Madison, (WD WI, May 6, 2021), a Wisconsin federal district court dismissed a suit for damages brought against city officials by The Lion of Judah House of Rastafari and its founders who claim that their eviction from their leased premises violated their rights under RLUIPA, the free exercise clause, the equal protection clause and other provisions. The premises served as a homeless shelter, and a location for the church which distributed cannabis to members in exchange for donations. The lessees were never able to obtain a certificate of occupancy allowing them to operate the former retail store site as a church. The court said in part:

[N]ot only have plaintiffs failed to link to any land use regulation a substantial burden, but they have failed to submit evidence of a substantial burden on their religious practices altogether, thus defeating both plaintiffs’ RLUIPA and First Amendment claims on the merits....

In particular ... plaintiffs’ asserted substantial burden on their religious practices is the October 16, 2019, eviction from the property. Critically, they do not take the position that (1) compliance with the City’s municipal ordinances would violate their religious beliefs, (2) the costs and inconvenience of compliance posed a substantial burden, or (3) the uncontested municipal court proceedings created a substantial burden on their ability to exercise their religious beliefs....

[E]ven assuming that defendants or any City officials treated plaintiffs’ unfairly during the permitting or inspection process (and again, the evidence does not support such a finding), a reasonable trier of fact would have no basis to conclude that treatment impacted the October 16, 2019, eviction from the property on this record.

Wisconsin State Journal has more on the decision.

Court Enjoins Enforcement of NJ Township's Ordinances Aimed At Orthodox Jewish Community

In WR Property LLC v. Township of Jackson, (D NJ, May 5, 2021), a New Jersey federal district court issued a preliminary injunction against enforcement of two township ordinances which effectively prevent construction of Jewish schools in most of Jackson Township's residential zones and which interfere with constructing of eruvim  (symbolic religious boundary markings). The court concluded that plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits of their free exercise and equal protection claims, finding sufficient evidence that the ordinances were enacted with a discriminator purpose. Both the Department of Justice and the state of New Jersey have previously sued the township over its targeting of Orthodox Jews.

Thursday, May 06, 2021

Connecticut Supreme Court Hears Arguments In Challenge To Gym's Women's Section

The Connecticut Supreme Court heard oral arguments (audio of full arguments) in Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities v. Edge Fitness LLC, (5/5/2021). Courthouse News Service reports in detail on the oral arguments and describes the issues involved:

In the underlying case, two gyms run by Edge Fitness set aside special workout areas only for women, catering primarily to devout Muslim and Jewish women who are forbidden by their religious beliefs to exercise with men. Nobody complained to the gyms’ management, according to the gyms’ attorneys.

After the separate sections were created, however, two male gym members filed discrimination complaints with the state Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities. A hearing officer initially concluded the separate workout areas did not violate the state law, likening the areas to single-sex bathrooms and locker rooms.

Briefs in the case are available online.

Denial of Insurance Coverage For Gender Dysphoria Violates ACA

In Pritchard v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Illinois, (WD WA, May 4, 2021), a Washington federal district court held that denying a transgender male insurance coverage for treatment of gender dysphoria violates the sex discrimination ban in the Affordable Care Act.  At issue was an exclusion in the Catholic Health Initiatives Health Plan that prevented a minor covered by his mother's health insurance from receiving an implant that delivers puberty-delaying hormones and a mastectomy.  The ACA incorporates the anti-discrimination provisions of Title IX. The court also rejected defendant's RFRA defense, concluding that RFRA only applies in suits in which the government is a party.

Wednesday, May 05, 2021

European Commission Appoints New Special Envoy For Freedom of Religion

 In-Cyprus reports today:

The European Commission has decided to appoint former crisis management and ebola coordination Commissioner Christos Stylianides, a Cypriot national, as Special Envoy for the promotion of freedom of religion or belief outside the EU, effective immediately.

According to the Commission, the Special Envoy will be attached to Vice-President Margaritis Schinas, who is in charge of leading the Commission`s dialogue with churches and religious associations or communities, and with philosophical and non-confessional organisations. Freedom of religion or belief is under attack in many parts of the world.

An ADF press release points out that the appointment comes after the position has been vacant for two years.

9th Circuit Hears Arguments On Idaho Ban Of Transgender Women In Sports

The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday heard oral arguments (video of full arguments) in Hecox v. Little, (5/4/2021).  In the case, an Idaho federal district court (full text of decision) in August 2020  held unconstitutional Idaho's law that bars transgender women from participating on women's sports teams. Yahoo News reports on the oral arguments.

Tuesday, May 04, 2021

Biden Issues Good Wishes On Orthodox Christian Easter Day

On Sunday, President Joe Biden issued a statement (full text) extending warm wishes from himself and the First Lady to their friends in the Orthodox Christian community observing Easter on that day. The statement said in part:

This is also a season of remembrance—to honor the sacrifice Jesus Christ made for the world and to stand in solidarity with all those in the Orthodox community who have been persecuted for their faith and those who remain under threat today.

Montana Makes It More Difficult To Obtain Transgender Name Change On Birth Certificates

Montana Governor Greg Gianforte recently signed Senate Bill 280 (full text) which provides in part:

The sex of a person designated on a birth certificate may be amended only if the department receives a certified copy of an order from a court with appropriate jurisdiction indicating that the sex of the person born in Montana has been changed b y surgical procedure.

Metro Weekly reports on the new law.