8th Circuit Denies Asylum To Russian Jewish Couple Who Claim Persecution

Yesterday the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the denial of an asylum claim by a Russian Jewish couple who have been in the United States for 15 years. In Pavlovich v. Gonzales, (8th Cir., Feb. 14, 2007), the court upheld an Immigration Judge's decision ordering removal of the couple to Russia, or alternatively to Latvia, and granting voluntary departure. The couple who originally lived in the portion of the Soviet Union that is now Russia, and who later moved to Latvia, claimed that they should be granted asylum in the United States because of past persecution of them in Latvia because of their Jewish heritage, and because of a well founded fear of future persecution because of anti-Semitism in both Russia and Latvia.

As to past persecution, the court held that neither the husband or wife "was ever arrested, detained, or questioned by Latvian authorities. Employment discrimination, anti-Semitic flyers, and harassment by private citizens -- even threats and random acts of violence -- are deplorable but do not compel a finding of past persecution." As to a fear of future persecution, the court found that the Immigration Judge was permitted to "reasonably rely on State Department reports assessing the likelihood of future persecution." The court refused to overule the Immigration Judge based on other reports of anti-Semitism in Russia and Latvia.

In concluding, Chief Judge Loken's opinion for the court said: " To us, it seems contrary to the traditions of this great Nation to remove an elderly, law-abiding couple who have spent fifteen productive years in this country to Russia, a country where they have not lived for nearly forty years and whose people do not yet enjoy our levels of economic, political, and religious freedom. But Congress has delegated this judgment to the Executive Branch." Yesterday's Minneapolis Star Tribune reported on the decision.

Courthouse Bible Study Group Defended

St. Charles County, Missouri officials have been asked by a local attorney to end a voluntary Bible study group that meets each week in the county courthouse. Judges, lawyers, and other courthouse employees began the study group-- led by Associate Circuit Judge Matthew E.P. Thornhill-- in 2002. In a press release issued yesterday, the American Center for Law and Justice defended the right of the Bible group to meet.

In a 9-page letter to St. Charles County Executive Steve Ehlmann, ACLJ argued: "An objective observer of the Bible study could not conclude that the government was endorsing the content of the group's private speech. This is not a case where any government employee or private citizen is required to participate in religious activity or where the speech is part of an official work-related meeting. There is no suggestion that employees have been harassed or intimidated or that the Bible study has disrupted the efficient performance of governmental functions. It is clear that the First Amendment prohibits the censorship of religious speech solely because someone may find that speech 'offensive.'"

8th Circuit Arguments Held On Faith-Based Prison Program; MP3 Version Available

The St. Louis Post Dispatch reports on yesterday's oral arguments in the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals in Americans United for Separation of Church and State v. Prison Fellowship Ministries, a case in which an Iowa district court held that InnerChange, a faith-based prison rehabilitation program financed with state funds, violates the Establishment Clause. The 3-judge panel in the Court of Appeals included retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. (See prior posting.) About 15 seconds into his argument, O'Connor cut off retired Iowa deputy attorney general, Gordon Allen to ask a question about recidivism rates in Iowa and in other states. An MP3 file of yesterday's entire oral argument can be played or downloaded from the 8th Circuit's website.

UPDATE: A fuller account of the oral arguments is available at this post from Anne Farris at The Roundtable [via Blog from the Capitol]. And here is a posting at Knippenblog (Joe Knippenberg) with links to the briefs and recent op-ed pieces on the case.

Sharia Mediation Board Created In Western Australia

In the Australian state of Western Australia, the state's Islamic Council has created a board of imams to mediate civil disputes between Muslims using Islamic legal principles. Perth Now reports on the developments. A spokesman for the non-profit Ethnic Communities Council said that the new Muslim board would be required report to the federal attorney-general to make sure that its decisions using Sharia do not conflict with Australian law.

Azerbaijan Considering More Restrictive Religious Freedom Law

Interfax today reports that Azerbaijan's Parliament is preparing to enact a more restrictive version of the country's 1992 Law on Freedom of Religious Belief. A member of Parliament was quoted as saying: "Missionary organizations of unconventional religious movements have intensified their activities in Azerbaijan and some of them are with radical views. These organizations are trying to entice Azeri citizens to join their ranks. In a number of cases such activities of these organizations are the result of the flaws in the legislation, which is why a new version of the law freedom of religion is now needed."

Yemeni Editor Gives Inside Look At Paper's Decision To Run Controversial Caricatures

On the first anniversary of the government-ordered suspension of the paper for publishing controversial Danish caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad, yesterday's Yemen Observer carried a fascinating account of last year's events by the newspaper's former editor, Mohammed al-Asaadi. He described the internal debate within the paper's editorial staff on the running of the drawings and his 12 days in jail that followed. He said: "I don’t think that we were stupid, but rather, that we were too rational at the wrong moment."

Kansas Reinstates Mainstream Science Guidelines On Evolution

The Kansas State Board of Education has once again changed the state's guidelines for teaching science in the public schools, reinstating a mainstream scientific approach on teaching of evolution. Today's Lawrence (KA) Journal-World reports that the move comes after a block of Democrats and moderate Republicans won control of the school board in November. (See prior posting.) By a 6-4 vote on Tuesday, the Board eliminated its earlier standards that encouraged the teaching of intelligent design. (See prior posting.) The new guidelines define science as a search for "natural explanations" of observations in the universe. The Board removed language suggesting that key evolutionary concepts were controversial and were challenged by new research. This is the fifth time in eight years that the state's science standards have been changed, and state law mandates updating of the standards again by 2014-- though changes could come sooner depending on the make-up of the board in the future.

DC Circuit Rejects Constitutional Challenge To Freezing Of Islamic Group's Assets

In Islamic American Relief Agency v. Gonzales, (DC Cir., Feb. 13, 2007), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld the federal government's blocking of the assets of IARA-USA which the government found to be a branch of another organization that had been designated as supporting global terrorism. In a portion of its opinion, the court rejected arguments by IARA-USA that blocking of its assets violated its Fifth Amendment right to equal protection and its First Amendment rights of association and free exercise of religion. The court rejected IARA-USA's claim that it had been singled out because it was a Muslim organization. The court held that the blocking does not inhibit associational activities other than financing and does not punish advocacy of IARA-USA's goals. It also rejected the argument that blocking of funds substantially burdens the religious exercise of IARA-USA's members because they intended their donations to fulfill their religious obligation to engage in humanitarian charitable giving. Quoting an earlier case it had decided, the court said: "There is no free exercise right to fund terrorists." A story yesterday from the Associated Press reported on the decision. [Thanks to How Appealing for the lead.]

Free Exercise Claim To Arrest Method Proceeds

In Stroman v. Lower Merion Twp., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9408 (ED PA, Feb. 7, 2007), two plaintiffs sued challenging the methods used by police officers in arresting them. One of the plaintiffs, Janice Myers, claimed that a police officer searched her by putting his hands all over her body, "including on her private parts and under her religious garb and undergarments," even though she had asked to be searched by a female officer. The court rejected her federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act claim because that statute has been held unconstitutional as applied to states and localities. However the court permitted her to proceed with a claim that Marion Township tolerated a policy of use of police power in violation of the Free Exercise Clause, and to proceed with claims against individual officers for their actions.

Congressional Interfaith Caucus Suggested

Last Friday, an essay by four clergy in the Washington Post suggested that the new Congress needs an Interfaith Caucus that would meet regularly to discuss the positive role that religion plays in people's lives and in communities, and to explore how religion is misused by demagogues around the world.

Suit Filed Over William & Mary Chapel Cross

The controversy (see prior posting) over when a cross will be displayed in College of William and Mary's Wren Chapel has now moved into the courts. Today's Hampton Roads Daily Press reports that a William and Mary Law School graduate has filed a federal lawsuit claiming that the College is restricting the practice of religion by removing the cross from permanent display. Charles Haynes, senior scholar at the First Amendment Center, says the suit is frivolous. The Daily Press reports that the plaintiff, George R. Leach, was disbarred in 2003, but is seeking reinstatement.

Christian School Challenges Exclusion From League

In San Antonio, Texas, Cornerstone Christian Schools has filed suit in federal district court challenging the decision by the University Interscholastic League to exclude the school from membership, according to today's San Antonio Express-News. The school is eligible only for membership in the Texas Association of Private and Parochial Schools because of the size of its enrollment. Cornerstone's attorney Jonathan Pauerstein said:"We contend that the UIL, by denying membership to private schools, denies access to the UIL's programs to the children of parents who seek a religious education for them. Here, we have a state-created organization denying participation to citizens who have made choices based on religion."

Idaho Legislator Told To Redraft Proposed Workers Comp Exemption For Clergy

In the Idaho legislature, the State Affairs Committee this week asked Rep. Dick Harwood to redraft a bill he had introduced. Harwood's intent was apparently to exempt churches from paying for Workers Compensation insurance for their clergy. His bill, however, broadly exempted churches from paying workers' compensation for any employee. This would have included thrift store workers, janitors, secretaries and other staff. Yesterday's New West Politics reports that committee chair Tom Loertscher appointed Rep. Lynn Luker, an attorney, to help Harwood with revising the bill's language.

Churches Complain About Sign Limits

Churches in Noblesville, Indiana complain that the city's sign ordinance infringes their religious freedom, according to a story in today's Noblesville Ledger. The ordinance limits all businesses, non-profit organizations and churches to displaying one banner per year, for a period of up to 4 weeks. Churches say this limits them in advertising church events, and even requires them to decide whether Christmas or Easter is the most important to advertise. Mayor John Ditslear said the city's planning staff is looking at whether the limits should be liberalized for churches.

Divorce Bills In Maryland Legislature Would Help Jewish Women

Late last month and earlier this month, bills were introduced into the Maryland state House (HB 324) and Senate (SB 533) that are designed to assist Jewish women in obtaining a religious divorce (get) from a recalcitrant husband. Without a religious divorce, under Jewish law the wife is unable to remarry. The bills would require anyone filing a complaint for divorce or annulment with a civil court in Maryland to also file an affidavit stating that the person has taken all steps within his control to remove all religious barriers to remarriage by the other party. Courts will not be able to order a husband to grant his wife a get. However, the civil court will not be able to enter a divorce decree until the affidavit is filed.

The Feb. 2 edition of the Forward carried an article on the proposed legislation that is designed to deal with the problem of agunot-- women trapped by their husbands' intransigence. However, many question the constitutionality of the proposed law-- and of a similar one already on the books in New York (DRL Sec. 253). Marc Stern, general counsel of the American Jewish Congress, said: "This is designed exclusively to deal with a religious problem, and it conditions a civil benefit-- a divorce-- on solving a religious problem. We don't think you can do that."

The Maryland Senate has scheduled its first hearing on the proposed legislation for Feb. 22.

Christian University Claims BFOQ Exemption In Firing Transgendered Faculty Member

Yesterday's Workplace Prof Blog discusses the legal issues involved in a Title VII employment discrimination claim brought by Professor Julie Marie Nemecek who was fired as assistant dean and Associate Professor at Michigan's Spring Arbor University. The school, that describes itself as having a "total commitment to Jesus Christ as its perspective for learning", dismissed Nemecek because she is transgendered and is transitioning from male to female. In response to Nemecek's EEOC complaint, the University said it was relying on the "bona fide occupational qualification" exception to Title VII. 42 USC 2000e-2(e) provides an exemption from the Act's prohibitions on discrimination on the basis of religion or gender where religion or sex is "a bona fide occupational qualification reasonably necessary to the normal operation of" the institution.

In a press release, it said: "We expect our faculty to model Christian character as an example for our students. Faculty who 'persist with activities that are inconsistent with the Christian faith'" are subject to being dismissed.

Arkansas Legislators Don't Like Thomas Paine's Views On Religion

The Arkansas House of Representatives last Thursday dealt a surprising defeat to a bill designating January 29 as "Thomas Paine Day" (HB 1317). Today's Associated Press reports that Democratic Rep. Lindsley Smith had wanted Arkansas to join nine other states that honor the Revolutionary War figure. However, Republican Rep. Sid Rosenbaum raised questions. Quoting from Paine's book, The Age of Reason, Rosenbaum said: "He did some good things for the nation, but the book that he wrote was anti-Christian and anti-Jewish. I don’t think we should be passing things out like this without at least debating it and letting people in the House know what we're voting on." Thursday's vote was 46-20, but the bill needed 51 votes to pass.

Today Is Darwin Day

MSNBC's Cosmic Log reports that today is "Darwin Day." Around the world over 850 events will mark the 198th anniversary of Charles Darwin's birth. Meanwhile, yesterday hundreds of churches marked "Evolution Sunday", an effort to show that religion and science can be compatible and that anti-evolution fundamentalists do not speak for thousands of Christian clergy.

Prisoner Religious Diet Litigation Hits Australia

While lawsuits by prisoners requesting special diets that comply with religious restrictions are common in the United States, apparently they are a new phenomenon in Australia. The Feb. 12 edition of Sydney's Daily Telegraph reported on a decision by Queensland's Supreme Court awarding $2000 in damages to a former Muslim prisoner who complained that prison officials would not supply him with fresh Halal meat. Instead they fed him vegetables, nuts and canned meat. The Government fears the decision could lead to an avalanche of suits from other prisoners whose special dietary requests may have been refused. Today, Judy Spence, Queensland's Minister for Police and Corrective Services, said she plans to ask Parliament to change the state's anti-discrimination law to prevent other prisoners succeeding in future cases. (ABC News Online).

UPDATE: Feb. 14 Australian reports that one of the victims of the Muslim prisoner who won this suit has urged the Queensland Government to freeze the funds awarded to him and file an appeal. The victim says she has had severe trauma from sexual abuse she suffered as a child at the hands of Sharif Mahommed.

Pressure In Thailand For Buddhism To Be Declared State Religion

In Thailand, pressure is growing for the country's Constitution Drafting Committee to declare Buddhism the nation's official religion in the new constitution it is drafting. The Nation today reports that Thailand's Defence Minister, General Boonrawd Somtas, is concerned over the controversy being generated by this issue. More than 90% of the country's population practices Buddhism