Egyptian Court Refuses To Issue New ID Cards To Reconverted Coptics

In Egypt, a Cairo court has refused to order the Ministry of Interior to issue new identity documents to ten Coptic Christians who converted to Islam and then decided to return to their original Coptic faith. They were reconverted in a public ceremony. AKI yesterday reported that the individuals will remain identified as Muslims on their identification cards. The Interior Ministry ruled that under Islamic law, it is impossible to renounce the Muslim faith. The court said it was unable to "to see into the depths of the heart" of the petitioners.

Jewish Caucus Formed In Germany's SDP-- A First Since Nazi Times

In Germany, a Jewish caucus has been set up within the country's Social Democratic Party. Haaretz today says that this is the first Jewish organization in a major German political party since the Nazi takeover of Germany in 1933. The Caucus of Jewish Social Democrats was founded by Peter Feldmann, a member of Frankfurt's city council and Sergey Lagodinsky, a Berlin law professor. The new group will be active on policies regarding Israel and the Middle East, and on questions of Jewish immigration into Germany.

Yeltsin's Funeral and Church-State Relations In Russia Today

In Russia yesterday, a traditional Orthodox Christian funeral service was held for the country's former president, Boris Yeltsin. The service, attended by dignitaries from around the world, was held in Christ the Savior Cathedral-- a church reconstructed with Yeltsin's approval while he was president. (New York Times). However, according to Interfax today, two Russian human rights groups and a Moscow group representing atheists protested the funeral as a violation of Russia's constitution. They said that Yeltsin should have been buried primarily with a civil ceremony, arguing that the exclusively Orthodox ecclesiastical ritual violated the rights of those holding other religious convictions. The press secretary for the Orthodox Moscow Patriarchate dismissed the complaint, saying: "When God wishes to punish somebody, He deprives them of their senses."

Meanwhile, Forum 18 today published a broad overview of the state of religious freedom in Russia. The detailed report is worth reading in full. Forum 18 summarizes its findings as follows:

Senior Russian state representatives ... continue to project an image of supporting "traditional religions" such as the Russian Orthodox Church.... But this does not translate into day-to-day decision making, as religious affairs are a low national priority. Decisions are normally made at a low level, so the religious freedom situation varies even between towns. One exception is support by senior state representatives for religious leaders who endorse them.... Legal discrimination is rare.... and where it exists does not completely halt religious activity. So-called "telephone law" and blocking some foreign religious workers have been the main sources of religious freedom violations. Acquiring or retaining worship buildings is a major problem.... Widening the legal definition of terrorism and extremism is a particularly concern for Muslims.

Anti-SLAPP Motion Not Available In Suit Challenging Free Exercise of Religion

California's anti-SLAPP statute (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16) is designed to protect individuals who speak out on public issues from having their voices chilled through costly legal challenges. The law permits a special motion to strike a complaint in a frivolous suit arising from an act "in furtherance of the person's right of petition or free speech ... in connection with a public issue". In Castillo v. Pacheco, (CA Ct. App. 2d Dist, April 25, 2007), a California appellate court, in a case of first impression, held that the anti-SLAPP law does not apply to a suit arising from an act of a person in furtherance of the person's right of free exercise of religion.

In the case, plaintiffs, the Castillos, had sued their neighbors, the Pachecos, alleging they were committing a nuisance by lighting large ceremonial outdoor open fires in their backyard. The Pachecos said that the fire was the core element of a religious Native American sweat lodge ritual, and filed an anti-SLAPP motion to dismiss the nuisance suit. Dismissing the motion, the court rejected "the Pachecos' attempt attempt to conflate the right of free speech and the right of free exercise of religion for purposes of application of the anti-SLAPP statute."

Judge Sets Low Bond For Defendant Who Knows His Bible

Should a defendant's knowledge of religious texts be relevant to his treatment in the criminal justice system? Yesterday's Cincinnati (OH) Enquirer reported that in Hamilton County's Municipal Court, Judge John Burlew released on low bond a defendant accused of using a stolen credit card. Defendant Eric Hine's attorney argued that his client was a churchgoer who is employed full time. The judge, skeptical of the claim, asked Hine to recite the 23rd Psalm. After Hine got the first verse right, the judge told him that he would let him out of jail if he could recite the entire psalm. Hine did, and Judge Burlew kept his word, releasing Hine on a $10,000 unsecured appearance bond.

UPDATE: WCPO reports that Eric Hine was back in jail on Friday on different charges. Meanwhile Judge John Burlew defended his actions as merely testing whether Hine's attorney was being accurate when he told the judge that Hine was a Christian.

High Priestess' Grave Robbing Conviction Reversed On Evidentiary Grounds

In State of New Jersey v. Miraballes, (NJ App Div, April 25, 2007), a New Jersey appellate court ordered a new trial for Miriam Miraballes who had been sentenced to prison for recruiting others to steal human remains for her from several cemeteries in Newark. She planned to use the remains in rituals associated with the religion known as Palo Mayombe. Miraballes was alleged to be a "high priestess of the religion. The court found that a lengthy hypothetical question asked of an expert witness was improper. Secondly, it found improper a question that led the expert witness to opine that "a high ... priestess will not testify to the truth of their true involvement in the religion and what the religion really is." The court said that this "put defendant in a position where before she ever testified - which she did not - she was labeled as untruthful." Am New York yesterday reporting on the court's decision said that the prosecution will appeal to the state's supreme court.

Audio of Sekulow-Weinstein Debate At AF Academy Available

On Tuesday, the U.S. Air Force Academy hosted a debate between Mikey Weinstein, head of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation who is leading the opposition to proselytizing in the military, and Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice who supports the right of military chaplains to pray in Jesus' name. The debate was described by the Colorado Springs Gazette as surprisingly cordial. KRCC Colorado Springs has posted an audio recording of the entire debate. [Thanks to Melissa Rogers for the lead.]

NC County Commission Adopts Group's Model Policy To Permit Opening Prayer

On Monday, the Transylvania County, North Carolina, Board of County Commissioners-- responding to a challenge by the ACLU-- unanimously agreed to continue to open board meetings with a prayer. It adopted a 5-page "model policy" drafted by the Alliance Defense Fund. (ADF Release). The Model Policy sets out the legal rationale for the resolution and then calls for an opening prayer (not listed as an agenda item for the meeting) to be offered voluntarily on a rotating basis by Board members. No guidelines on prayer content will be issued. Each Board member may pray according to the dictates of his or her own conscience. Presumably this permits prayers to contain sectarian references. However "the Board shall request by the language of this policy that no prayer should proselytize or advance any faith, or disparage the religious faith or non-religious views of others."

Finally, the resolution provides that it "shall not be ... construed ... to affiliate the Board with, nor express the Board’s preference for, any faith or religious denomination. Rather, this policy is intended to ... express the Board’s respect for the diversity of religious denominations and faiths represented and practiced among the citizens of the County..."

Via Rail Will Allow Sikhs To Carry Kirpans; Sikh Wins Suit Against Bally

VIA Rail, which operates Canada’s passenger rail service, has reached a settlement with a Sikh student who had been removed from a passenger train for wearing a kirpan (Sikh ceremonial dagger). CBC News reported yesterday that the settlement, obtained through the Canadian Human Rights Commission, includes a refund of the fare paid by the student. More broadly, it involves a change in VIA Rail policy-- already implemented in January-- that allows Sikhs to wear ceremonial daggers on board trains. Student Balpreet Singh said: "I'd have been happier if [Via Rail] had just spoken to me, tried to understand the situation and resolve it...."

Meanwhile, in Fresno, California, a consent decree approved last week orders Bally Total Fitness to pay "Devin" Singh Dhaliwal, a Sikh, $24,000 in damages. The health club must also provide its Fresno managers with training in equal opportunity hiring practices. According to the Associated Press, in a job interview Dhaliwal was asked where his parents were born, what his religion is, and whether he is a Muslim.

Irish Labour Court Rules Against Employees' Push For Catholic Holidays Off

Ireland's Labour Court has ruled that under Irish law, businesses are only required to give employees time off for the nine public holidays set out in the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997. Today's Irish Independent reports that workers at the Lisavaird Co-op in Clonakilty, west Cork, lost their attempt to get time off for four Catholic holy days-- Epiphany, the Assumption of Our Lady, All Saints and the Immaculate Conception. In the past the co-op has closed on those days, but management now wants to open and is willing to compensate its 70 workers for their added time. Workers say the time off is "sacrosanct", but the Labour Court has recommended that staff agree to the holy days being normal working days in the future with four days' annual leave to compensate them.

NYU Report Charges US Is Illegally Delaying Naturalization of Muslims

New York University's Center for Human Rights and Global Justice today issued a 63-page report charging that the U.S. government is illegally delaying the naturalization applications of thousands of Muslim, Arab, Middle Eastern and South Asian immigrants by profiling them and subjecting them to indefinite security checks. (Press Release). Much of the delay is caused by the government's name check process. The report concludes that relying on names and national origins as proxies for security risk is both over- and under-inclusive, does not yield timely or accurate information, diverts law enforcement resources, and legitimizes prejudice of the general public.

The full report, titled Americans on Hold: Profiling, Citizenship, and the "War on Terror" , as well as a 12-page summary briefing paper, and a one-page summary in Arabic are available online. Podcasts of interviews relating to the reports are also available (Segment 1; 2; 4; 5; 6.)

Things Get Complicated In Nashville's Attempt to Reschedule Election Runoff

Nashville's City Paper today reports that things are becoming much more complicated for Davidson County Tennessee's Election Commission that is trying to reschedule Nashville's runoff primary election in September to avoid a conflict with the Jewish holiday of Rosh Hashanah. (See prior postings 1, 2.) The dispute began when two Jewish voters filed suit in federal court seeking a schedule change. Three days after the election commission agreed to reschedule the runoff, the Department of Law of Metro Nashville & Davidson County filed a petition to intervene in the lawsuit-- purportedly on behalf of Elections Administrator Ray Barrett-- to argue that the rescheduling is illegal. It says that the Metro Charter prescribes the original date that was set for the runoff. Now elections administrator Barrett has requested that the court issue a temporary restraining order to force Metro Legal Department to drop its attempt to intervene in his name. Part of the issue is whether Barrett is a state or county employee. State law set up his position, but the county pays his salary. Metro's law department claims that the county could be faced with heavy costs if a rescheduled runoff is later challenged and a new election is required to be conducted.

En Banc 5th Circuit Finds TX Bible Monument Case Moot; But Injunction Retained

The dispute over the display of a Bible in a monument on the grounds of the Harris County (TX) court house is now moot. In an en banc decision in Staley v. Harris County, Texas, (5th Cir., April 24, 2007), the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals decided that it would not reach the merits of the Establishment Clause challenge because, just days before oral argument in the case, the county placed the monument in storage to permit renovation of the court house grounds. However (over the dissent of 2 judges) the court left the district court judgment in place. The district court had found an Establishment Clause violation and had ordered the county to remove the monument. That determination had been upheld by a 3-judge panel of the 5th Circuit. The 5th Circuit's en banc opinion also decided that plaintiff was entitled to an award of attorneys' fees. According to today's Houston Chronicle, fees at the trial level were assessed at $40,000, and plaintiff's appellate fees have reached $200,000.

Three of the 16 judges on the en banc panel dissented arguing that the case should be remanded for fact finding on whether it could reasonably be expected that the county would reinstall the monument in the future.

Americans United, the group that had filed the lawsuit originally, issued a release applauding the court's decision to leave the injunction in place. Reporting on the decision, today's Houston Chronicle says that Harris County will likely appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Postal Unit Violates Establishment Clause By Displaying Religious Material

In Cooper v. United States Postal Service, (D CT, April 18, 2007), a Connecticut federal district court held that a contract postal unit (CPU)-- a private business that has contracted with the U.S. Postal Service to provide postal services to the public-- violates the Establishment Clause when it posts religious displays that proselytize or advance religion. Some 5,200 CPUs operate nationwide in locations such as and colleges, grocery stores, and pharmacies. Several are operated by groups with religious affiliations. The court held that the CPU contract with Sincerely Yours, Inc.-- a non-profit set up by Full Gospel Interdenominational Church-- does not violate the Establishment Clause. However SYI's religious displays in its CPU in Manchester, New Hampshire do. In addition to discussing the Establishment Clause, the court's decision contains an extensive discussion of the "state action" doctrine, concluding that the "SYI CPU is so entwined with the Postal Service that its conduct may be deemed state action." A report in yesterday's Boston Globe discusses the court's decision.

British Agency Issues Guides For Wearing Niqab In Court

Britain's Judicial Studies Board has recently published an update to its Equal Treatment Bench Book including "Guidance On the Wearing of the Full Veil, or Niqab, In Court". Here are excerpts:

[F]or Muslim women who do choose to wear the niqab, it is an important element of their religious and cultural identity. To force a choice between that identity (or cultural acceptability), and the woman’s involvement in the criminal, civil justice, or tribunal system (as a witness, party, member of court staff or legal office-holder) may well have a significant impact on that woman’s sense of dignity and would likely serve to exclude and marginalise further women with limited visibility in courts and tribunals....

The primary question that needs to be asked by any judicial office holder before coming to a decision is: What is the significance of seeing this woman’s face to the judicial task that I have to fulfil?

The guidelines go on to discuss the varying considerations when a woman seeking to wear the niqab is a judge, a juror, a victim or complainant, a witness or defendant, or an advocate. Articles in The Lawyer.com and the Associated Press yesterday discussed the Board's new guidelines.

Pressure Continues In Thailand For Buddhism As State Religion

In Thailand, pressure continues for drafters of the country's new Constitution to include in it a provision making Buddhism the nation's official religion. (See prior posting.) A march today by 500 saffron-robed monks-- along with nine elephants-- and a demonstration by 1400 people outside of Parliament pressed the demand, according to a report by Reuters. Thailand's Council for National Security-- the group that instituted last September's coup-- apparently is willing to accede to these demands, even though the Council's chairman is a Muslim.

Russia's Yeltsin Remembered For Mixed Legacy On Religious Freedom

Boris Yeltsin, first president of post-Soviet Russia, who died Monday left a mixed legacy on freedom of religion according to Christianity Today. Yeltsin initially lifted some restrictions on churches and laid the groundwork for the Orthodox Church to re-emerge as an important institution. (New York Times 1997 article.) However, the same law that aided the Orthodox Church-- the Law on Freedom of Conscience and Religious Associations-- has been criticized as discriminatory against newer religious groups. Only religious communities categorized as "religious organizations", instead of "religious groups", can enjoy full rights. (1997 Human Rights News.)

Suit Challenges Pricing Of Indiana's "In God We Trust" Plates

The ACLU has filed suit against the Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles challenging the state's practice of selling its "In God We Trust" license plates at the same prices as standard plates instead of charging the $15 administrative fee that must be paid for other specialty plates. (See prior posting.) Yesterday's report from the Associated Press says that plaintiff Mark E. Studler on whose behalf the ACLU brought the suit paid the administrative fee when he purchased specialty environmental plates. ACLU attorney Ken Falk says that waiver of the fee amounts to promotion of the religious-themed plate by the state. However Rep. Woody Burton who sponsored the legislation creating the plate says that no added fee is charged because these plates are stock items that do not generate financial support for any particular group. [Thanks to Joshua Claybourn for the lead.]

UPDATE: April 29th's Indy Star carries an interview with BMV Commissioner Ron Stiver on Inidana's controversial license plates. He says that BMV is not promoting one plate over any of the other 75 available designs.

Preacher Loses Challenge To Miami University's Speech Policy

In Gilles v. Hodge, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29369 (SD OH, April 20, 2007), an Ohio federal district court rejected a free speech and free exercise challenge by a Christian preacher who was not permitted to speak at Miami University's Academic Quad. The state University requires sponsorship by a student organization of any speaker on campus. James Gilles, who regularly preaches at universities, was told by campus security that he could only speak on city sidewalks or streets outside of campus. The court held that the University's speech policy is content-neutral and reasonable in light of the purpose served by the limited public forum that the University has created on campus. The court also rejected claims that the University's speech policy is overbroad and vague, and that plaintiff was discriminated against. (See prior related posting.)

Cert. Denied In Case Interpreting "Ministerial Exception" To Title VII

Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in Petruska v. Gannon University, Case No. 06-985 (Order List). At issue was the 3rd Circuit's holding that the "ministerial exception' to Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act can shield religious institutions not just from suits claiming religious discrimination, but also from those claiming discrimination on a ground other than religious belief. (See prior posting.) The AP yesterday reported on the case. [Thanks to Donald C. Clark, Jr. for the lead.]