Establishment Clause Challenge To Criminalizing Murder of Fetus Rejected

In Flores v. State of Texas, (TX 9th Ct. App., Jan. 24, 2007), a Texas state court of appeals rejected an Establishment Clause challenge to a provision of Texas criminal law that defines capital murder as including the murder of "an unborn child at every stage of gestation from fertilization until birth". The claim was raised in an appeal of a conviction by Gerardo Flores who had been sentenced to life in prison for killing his girlfriend's twin sons in utero by hitting the pregnant woman and stepping on her abdomen. Flores had argued that the statute was unconstitutional because it adopted a religious view of the commencement of life. The court, however, said that a statute does not violate the Establishment Clause merely because it is consistent with religious views. It said that the challenged statute does not foster excessive government entanglement with religion, but rather protects the future viability of the unborn child.

The court also rejected Flores equal protection claim that focused on the fact that the statute excepts from punishment a pregnant mother who aborts a fetus, while it punishes a biological father who takes action to do so.

House Resolution Honors Contributions of Catholic Schools

On Tuesday, the U.S. House of Representative passed H. Res. 51: Honoring the Contributions of Catholic Schools, by a vote of 428 to 0 (with 7 voting "present"). The Resolution supports the goals of Catholic Schools Week. It points out that 14% of students enrolled in Catholic schools are non-Catholic, and says that "Catholic schools produce students strongly dedicated to their faith, values, families, and communities by providing an intellectually stimulating environment rich in spiritual, character, and moral development."

Christian Group Excluded From Pagan Pride Festival Sues

In Grand Rapids, Michigan earlier this week, the Alliance Defense Fund filed suit in federal district court on behalf of David Ickes and seven other members of the Worldwide Street Preachers' Fellowship who were prevented by police from preaching to a crowd gathered in a public park for a Pagan Pride Festival. (Press release.) The complaint (full text) in Worldwide Street Preachers' Fellowship v. City of Grand Rapids, claims that city ordinances requiring a permit for public speeches and religious meetings in any public park, as well as the city's disorderly conduct ordinance, violate plaintiffs' First Amendment rights. Plaintiffs' memorandum in support of its motion for a preliminary injunction is also available online.

Ministerial Exception Bars Race Claim By Church Music Director

In Ross v. Metropolitan Church of God, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4784 (ND GA, Jan. 23, 2007), a Georgia federal district court applied the "ministerial exception" to Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act to dismiss a racial discrimination claim brought by the former Pastor of Worship Arts of the Metropolitan Church of God against the Church and its Senior Pastor. The Senior Pastor was charged with making racially insensitive remarks to plaintiff, who is African-American, and telling him that his music "won't work here" because "this is a white church". Ultimately plaintiff was fired. The court held that the First Amendment precludes it from making the kind of inquiry that would be involved in this case-- determining what is suitable music for worship services at the Metropolitan Church. The case had originally been filed in state court and removed to federal court. The court remanded the remaining state law claims to state court.

High School Graduation In Church Building Considered

In Montgomery County, Maryland, the Board of Education is struggling with a difficult decision on whether to hold this year's Blair High School graduation in the Jericho City of Praise Church. Wednesday's Washington Jewish Week reports that the Church's 10,000-seat auditorium is the only local venue large enough for the ceremony. However, some potential attendees say they are uncomfortable being in the auditorium that contains a pediment with the words "Jesus is the Lord" at the back of the stage. The Church says it will not cover the inscription for the graduation. Also a stained glass window with a cross is there, and "Jesus is the Lord!!!" is written in large letters on the outside of the building.

The Board's other choices for graduation, however, are not attractive. DAR Constitution Hall only seats 4,000, has parking and accessibility problems. Also the DAR has a segregationist history. Show Place Arena also is not well designed for graduations and is not near a Metro stop. An arena can be rented from the University of Maryland, but that will cost $37,000, while Jericho City of Praise Church does not charge for use of its facilities.

UPDATE: On Jan. 31, Washington Jewish Week reported that Blair High School graduation will be held at the Comcast Center in College Park, and that Montgomery County Public Schools will cover the cost for all other high schools in the county to also hold their graduations at Comcast Center.

Ohio Teacher Challenges Required Dues To Union That Supports Abortion

CNS News reported yesterday on a federal lawsuit that was filed this week in Columbus, Ohio challenging the constitutionality of a provision of the state's public employee labor relations law. Ohio Revised Code section 4117.09(C) exempts from the requirement to pay union dues "any public employee who is a member of and adheres to established and traditional tenets or teachings of a bona fide religion or religious body which has historically held conscientious objections to joining or financially supporting an employee organization..." St. Mary's school teacher Carol Katter is a Catholic, and refuses to pay dues to her public employee union because it supports abortion on demand. She says that Ohio's law amounts to an unconstitutional establishment of religion because it exempts only adherents of specific faiths such as Seventh-Day Adventists and Mennonites. She says that her union (Ohio Education Association) told her she would need to change religions in order to get an exemption.

Last September, in another similar suit, the Justice Department and the EEOC entered a consent decree with a different public employee union requiring it to allow any employee with sincere religious objections to paying union dues to instead make a donation to charity. (See prior posting.)

Shariah Divorce Refusal May Be Sentencing Consideration In Canada

In Canada, prosecutors have argued to a Montreal court that a Muslim man's refusal to grant a Shariah divorce to his wife should be considered an aggravating factor when he is sentenced for stabbing her and their baby daughter. Meanwhile, Quebec's ban on the use of religious tribunals to settle family law disputes has placed the wife in a difficult position. She wants to go back to her family in Lebanon, but fears that without an Islamic divorce, if she does she will be forced to return to her husband or be charged with abducting her own daughter. Reporting on the case yesterday, the Montreal Gazette says that Shahina Siddiqui, executive director of the Islamic Social Services Association suggested the woman obtain a civil divorce in Canada and then ask an imam or a panel of Muslim scholars to acknowledge the court divorce.

Detroit Muslim Says His Daughter Kept From Islam By State Caseworker

Yesterday's Detroit News reports that on Monday a suit was filed in a Michigan federal district court by a Muslim father who is in a custody fight over his daughter. The suit claims that the state's Department of Human Services and a local church are conspiring to prohibit his daughter from practicing Islam. Abraham Ben-Abbad of Dearborn alleges that a caseworker told his former wife that she could ignore a court order and keep their 13-year old daughter from visiting her father during Ramadan and on other religious holidays. He also claims that the caseworker permitted the pastor of Dearborn Assembly of God Church to help plan his daughter's future. The lawsuit claims that the church's pastor, Trey Hancock, operates an outreach program for American women married to Muslim men, and that his ministry is directed at converting Muslims to Christianity.

London Rabbi Cleared Of Excessive Noise Charges

In Britain, a High Court has ruled in favor of a North London rabbi charged with violating a noise abatement order. Yesterday's Metro reported that Rabbi Moshe Rottenberg had been charged by a Muslim neighbor of his synagogue with excessive noise-- chanting, stamping and shouting. However the crown court, overturning the rabbi's conviction by a magistrate, found that the noise was infrequent and did not amount to a nuisance. Rabbi Rottenberg's lawyers argued that the noise occurred only on holy days. The High Court, upholding the crown court, said that the judge did not have to follow the views of environmental health officers who thought the noise was excessive.

Rehearing Scheduled For Niqab-Wearing Woman's Small Claims Case

Yesterday's Detroit Free Press reports that a new hearing has been granted to Ginnnah Muhammad, the Muslim woman whose small-claims case in Hamtramck (MI) was dismissed last October when she refused a judge's order to remove her veil while testifying. (See prior posting.) Muhammad says she plans again to wear her niqab (full face veil). It is unclear what Judge Paul Paruk's reaction to this will be at the Feb. 21 hearing. The case involves claims between Muhammad and a rental car company.

Pakistan's Blasphemy Laws May Eventually Be Changed

Reform of Pakistan's blasphemy laws has become a subject of increasing interest. This recent background article from Pakistan's The News argues: "Blasphemy laws are objectionable for three fundamental reasons: (i) they violate Article 25 of the constitution that makes all citizens equal before law and entitled to its equal protection; (ii) they are manipulated to penalize and harass citizens belonging to minority communities; and (iii) they undermine free speech and encourage religious bigotry and obscurantism by threatening to persecute intellectuals and scholars who debate or question stereotypical views on religious doctrine."

The issue has become more pressing in light of last week's decision by the Lahore High Court overturning the 25-year sentence of a Christian, Shahbaz Masih Kaka. The court found that the original accusations against the mentally disabled youth, who had already spent 18 months in jail, were not credible. (AsiaNews.it, Jan. 22.) A senior Pakistani government official says that the blasphemy laws will be amended after the national elections that will be held later this year or early next year. Senator Mushahid Hussain Sayed, chairman of the Pakistan Senate's foreign affairs committee, said that action any earlier than that would give an election issue to opposition Islamic parties. (Catholic News, Jan. 25).

District Court Dismisses Poway School T-Shirt Claim As Related Cert. Petition Is Pending

Last April, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the denial of a preliminary injunction in a suit brought by two California high school students claiming that their high school improperly banned one of them-- Tyler Harper-- from wearing a T-shirt proclaiming: "Be Ashamed, Our School Embraced What God Has Condemned", and "Homosexuality Is Shameful". A school rule banned the T-shirts as "hate behavior". A petition for cert. is pending in the U.S. Supreme Court. Now in Harper v. Poway Unified School District, (SD CA, Jan. 24, 2007), the district court has dismissed claims brought by Tyler Harper as moot because he has graduated. It also rejected the First Amendment and state law challenges to the school's hate behavior policies brought by Tyler's sister, Kelsie Harper. Yesterday's San Diego Union-Tribune reported on the decision. It says that Kevin Theriot, lawyer for the Harpers, says they will appeal the district court decision.

UPDATE: On Feb. 7, Alliance Defense Fund filed a notice of appeal on behalf of Tyler and Kelsie Harper.

Indian State Seeks Return Of Lands Held By Catholic Missionaries

The Indian state of Chattisgarh has filed 262 cases against the Catholic Church seeking to obtain the return of land on which Catholic missionaries have built hospitals, schools and other institutions. The state's government is controlled by the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party. Relying on local legislation that bans the sale of Tribal lands to non-Tribals, in one of the cases a local court has required the Sisters of the Holy Cross return to 12 acres on which they built a monastery and a school. Asia News reported yesterday that more than 80,000 Tribals demonstrated in support of the Catholic Church last Monday. One demonstrator said that the land "was not stolen from us, but was regularly sold to the Church by our ancestors, which now uses it to help. We are happy for the schools and hospitals [because they] educate us and provide us with medical care."

Recently Available Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Cummings v. Darsey, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4257 (D NJ, Jan. 16, 2007), a New Jersey federal district court permitted a Muslim prisoner to proceed with a challenge to a drug treatment program that he is required to attend. He claimed that it includes a religious component that is offensive to him as a Muslim and that attendance at the program prevents from attending most of the Muslim religious services that are available.

In Furnace v. Arceo, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3725 (ND CA, Jan. 5, 2007), a California federal district court permitted a state prisoner to proceed with a free exercise and equal protection challenge claiming he was denied religious meals and refused a transfer to another prison that could provide him such meals.

Whitfield v. v. Illinois Dep't of Corrections, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94779 (ND IL, March 20, 2006) is an older case that has just become available on Lexis. In it the court rejected a prisoner's claim that his right to practice his African Hebrew Israelite religion (including its dietary restrictions) was infringed, and that retaliation was practiced against him for filing a grievance. Plaintiff failed to prove that he was in fact affiliated with the African Hebrew Israelite religion.

Lawson v. McDonough, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94681 (ND FL, Dec. 27, 2006) involved claims under RLUIPA and the Florida Religious Freedom Restoration Act by an Orthodox Jewish inmate who was serving a life sentence in Florida. He asserted that he was denied the right to observe over a dozen religious requirements. In a lengthy opinion, a federal magistrate judge in Florida federal district court recommended permiting him to move ahead with some of his claims, but dismissed others because plaintiff had not exhausted his administrative remedies or because of mootness or lack of standing to raise the claims.

Liberal Clergy Question Goal Of Proposed New Hampshire Bill On Marriages

In New Hampshire, House Bill 69 recently introduced into the legislature may interfere with the right of liberal clergy to perform religious wedding ceremonies for same-sex couples. Yesterday's Concord Monitor says, however, that the the bill's sponsor, Republican Representative Daniel Itse, denies that this is the bill's goal. He says it is aimed at strengthening separation of church and state and is neutral on the issue of same-sex ceremonies.

The bill would amend RSA 457.37 that currently exempts some religious officials from obtaining licenses to perform marriages. The amended statute would read: "Nothing contained in this chapter shall affect the right of ... religious officiants authorized by their church, religion, sect, or denomination to solemnize marriages in the way usually practiced among them, and all marriages so solemnized shall be valid unless proscribed by RSA 457:1 or RSA 457:2". Sections 457:1 and 2 prohibit, among other things, same-sex marriages.

Reform Rabbi Richard Klein of Temple Beth Jacob in Concord says the bill is a response to the growing practice among liberal clerics to stop asking for licenses from couples, gay or straight, who seek religious marriages. He fears that the statute implies some kind penalty-- such as loss of the right to perform any marriages-- for clergy who perform same-sex marriage ceremonies. He says that interferes with freedom of religion. Rev. Jed Rardin, pastor of South Congregational Church in Concord, says he officiates at marriage ceremonies for same-sex couples even though they are not legally recognized.

Philadelphia Anti-Gay Pride Protesters Lose Civil Rights Suit

Last week, a Pennsylvania federal district court handed a defeat to a group of evangelical Christians who brought civil rights claims after they were prevented from disseminating their anti-gay messages at a 2004 Philadelphia gay pride event. (See prior posting.) In Startzell v. City of Philadelphia, (ED PA, Jan. 18, 2007), the court held that Philadelphia's content-neutral permit requirement did not violate the group's First Amendment rights. It held that organizers of Philly Pride had the right to exclude the Christian group's contrary message from their event. The court found that the Philadelphia police acted to protect First Amendment rights and prevent violence at the event, saying that there is no constitutional right to drown out the speech of another person. Yesterday's Philadelphia Inquirer covered the decision and reported that an appeal is planned. [Thanks to How Appealing for the lead.]

Russian Court Finds Nude In Ad Violates Religious Norms

In Moscow this week, a Russian trial court has upheld a complaint brought by Russia's Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS) against a magazine publisher that ran an ad featuring a semi-nude model in its Moulin Rouge magazine. Interfax reported yesterday that the FAS relied on quotations from the Bible and the Koran in demonstrating that the ad violates "the commonly accepted norms of humanity and morality" and contains "offensive images of the religious beliefs of natural persons". Alexander Osokin, lawyer for the publisher, Rodinov Publishing House, says his client will appeal. He said: "we did not insult religious things; the model in the advertisement does not hold any crosses or crescents or other symbols in her hands. The FAS can go too far in this way and turn our state into a clerical one."

Suit Seeks Right To Proselytize Outside Shopping Center

On Monday, Alliance Defense Fund filed suit in federal court against the city of Jacksonville, Florida on behalf Christian activist John Schaffer to vindicate his right to proselytize passersby near Jacksonville Landing shopping center. (Press release.) At issue are his speech rights in the exterior commons area and perimeter sidewalks of the Landing. These are owned by the city and are not leased to the shopping center. The complaint in Schaffer v. City of Jacksonville (full text) alleges violations of the First and 14th Amendments and of Florida's Religious Freedom Restoration Act. ADF has filed a Memorandum in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment.

Court's Revocation of Treatment Alternative Not Based On Religion

In State of Ohio v. Caulley, (OH 12 Dist. Ct. App., Jan. 22, 2007), an Ohio appellate court upheld a trial judge's revocation of a community control sanction that allowed a convicted defendant to attend a treatment program instead of serving his 3-year prison sentence. Keith Caulley had asked to be removed from the MonDay program because it violated religious beliefs. He said that the program would require him to report the disruptive behavior of other participants, contrary to his religious beliefs. He believed that it is only God's job to judge.

In revoking the community control sanction and sentencing Caulley to prison, the judge made remarks such as: "Can you tell me where in the Bible it says it is all right to drink and drive, it is all right to flee the police, it is all right to steal your children? You have a record that is four pages long, what part of God's plan does that come under?" Caulley claimed that this demonstrates his sentence was based on his religious belief, in violation of Ohio Revised Code 2929.11(C) and the First Amendment's Establishment Clause. The Court of Appeals, however, disagreed, finding that the judge's remarks were merely an expression of skepticism regarding the sincerity of Caulley's religious beliefs that he claimed prevented him from completing the MonDay program

Jacksonville Settles "Day of Faith" Lawsuit

The city of Jacksonville, Florida has settled a suit filed against it last summer challenging city sponsorship of a Day of Faith anti-violence rally. (See prior posting.) Yesterday News4Jax reported that the city has issued a directive providing that all future city programs must have a secular purpose, must not advance or inhibit religion, and must not foster excessive entanglement with religion. The city will also pay plaintiffs, American Atheists, $5000 plus court costs.