Objective coverage of church-state and religious liberty developments, with extensive links to primary sources.
Saturday, November 10, 2007
Harvard Law Prof To Become US Ambassador To Holy See
Friday, November 09, 2007
Appeals Court Hears Arguments On Concealed Carry Law's Application To Churches
Washington Court Enjoins Enforcement of Pharmacy Board Rules
Applying strict scrutiny to the regulations, the court concluded:The evidence thus far presented to the Court strongly suggests that the overriding objective of the subject regulations was, to the degree possible, to eliminate moral and religious objections from the business of dispensing medication.
... [T]he enforcement mechanism of the new law appears aimed only at a few drugs and the religious people who find them objectionable.
Relying on these findings, the court enjoined enforcement of the regulations against any pharmacy or pharmacist who refuses to fill a prescription for Plan B emergency contraceptives if they immediately refer the patient to a nearby source for it. Today's Seattle Times reports on the decision.the interests promoted by the regulations have more to do with convenience and heartfelt feelings than with actual access to certain medications. Patients understandably may not want to drive farther than the closest pharmacy and they do not want to be made to feel bad when they get there. These interests are certainly legitimate but they are not compelling interests of the kind necessary to justify the substantial burden placed on the free exercise of religion.
... On the evidence now before it, the Court cannot say that the subject regulations advance a compelling state interest and they are narrowly tailored to accomplish their announced purpose.... [T]he evidence suggests that the burden on the religious practices of plaintiffs is intentional not incidental, and substantial not minimal.
Federal Court Rejcts Attempt To Bar NJ Civil Rights Proceedings
Mt. Soledad Establishment Clause Challenge Dismissed
The court rejected three theories of standing. It held that any denial of use of the Memorial as it now exists was not impacted by the mere transfer of land ownership. It rejected general taxpayer standing because invalidating the land transfer would not redress any injury Trunk suffered. Finally the court rejected Trunk's argument that the transfer gave him standing because it prevented the enforcement of a previous injunction based on the California Constitution. The U.S. as owner is not subject to the California Constitution. The court said:
Public Law 109-272 merely provides for the acquisition of land, the compensation of the land's owners, and the maintenance of the property as a veterans memorial. These are not religious actions, nor do they injure Trunk.... Trunk tries to conflate acquisition of the Mt. Soledad property with unconstitutional operation of the property.The court additionally pointed out that if it were to invalidate the law being challenged, the federal government would still own the Memorial under a transfer to it by the city which was ultimately upheld by the courts. NBC San Diego covers the decision in a short story.
Georgia Governor Plans Prayer Service For Rain
Church Leader Gets Probation On Sacramental Marijuana Charges
Suit Threatened Over Surveillance of Religious Order's Building
Sonoma CA Will Not Have Creches On City Plaza
Thursday, November 08, 2007
Civil Rights Groups Urge Investigation of White House Faith-Based Office
Negligence Claims Against Religious Order In Sex Abuse Case Survive 1st Amendment
College's Civility Code Enjoined In Suit By Students Who Stomped On Religious Flag
No Free Exercise Claim For Limiting Disclosures to Clergyman
Rules on Bibles For Spectators and Athletes at 2008 Olympics Attract Notice
Separately, the Olympics website says that spectators entering the country to attend the Olympics should take no more than one Bible into the country. China generally restricts imports of Bibles. The government-controlled Nanjing Amity Printing Co. has a monopoly on the printing of Bibles inside China. Another portion of the Olympics website tells visitors that "China is a country with religious freedom and respects every religion", and lists information on Buddhist, Christian and Muslim places of worship in Beijing.
Little notice has been given to another entry restriction for visitors posted on the Olympic site just before its warning about Bibles: "Any printed material, film, tapes that are 'detrimental to China's politics, economy, culture and ethics' are also forbidden to bring into China."
In Wales, Sikh Teen Challenges School's Jewelry Ban
Catholic Bishops Counsel Was Formerly With Becket Fund
House Passes Controversial Employment Non-Discriminnation Act
Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases
In Blount v. Jabe, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81789 (WD VA, Nov. 5, 2007), a Virginia federal district court rejected plaintiff prisoner's First Amendment and RLUIPA claims alleging that on two different dates the rules for Common Fare diets were violated because the Common Fare meal contained fish and dairy products together. The court found no intentional conduct that deprived plaintiff of his rights. It also concluded that no substantial burden was placed on plaintiff's free exercise of religion.
In Wares v. Simmons, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81351 (D KS, Oct. 31, 2007), a Kansas federal district court upheld prison restrictions on the property that a prisoner can possess after he was sanctioned for refusing to participate in a sexual abuse treatment program. Plaintiff challenged a rule that permitted him only to possess primary religious texts of his faith, and not other religious books. Considering the claim after a remand by the 10th Circuit, the court held that preventing a Jewish prisoner from possessing the "Tanya" and/or the "Tehillim" did not substantially burden his exercise of religion. Moreover the policy served legitimate penological interests and that plaintiff had the alternative of donating his books to the prison library and using them there.
In Hewitt v. Henderson, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80812 (WD LA, Sept. 6, 2007), a Louisiana federal district court dismissed a prisoners free exercise and equal protection claims. Under extended lockdown rules, plaintiff was not released from work for Friday Muslim prayer. He was, however, permitted to pray in his cellblock. The court found no violation of the prisoner's constitutional rights.
In Tirone v. Trella, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79812 (D NJ, Oct. 29, 2007), a New Jersey federal district court rejected a free exercise challenge to a jail's high security lockdown policy that prevented plaintiff from attending weekly Jumah prayer services.