Objective coverage of church-state and religious liberty developments, with extensive links to primary sources.
Sunday, December 09, 2007
Florida Becomes Latest Venue For Debate On Teaching Evolution
Indian Panel Complicates Award of Benefits To Dalit Converts
Mormon Student's Suit Against West Virginia Scholarship Board Settled
Saturday, December 08, 2007
Naturalization Oath Modified To Accommodaate Raelian
UPDATE: 8 CFR Sec. 337.1(b) specifically permits deletion of "so help me God" from the oath for reasons of conscience. [Thanks to posted Comment from Scott M.]
Two Reports On Faith-Based Activities Released
The second report was The State of the Law 2007: Legal Developments Affecting Government Partnerships with Faith-Based Organizations , written by law professors Ira Lupu and Robert Tuttle. The report covers areas such as standing, legislative earmarks, child custody, various kinds of government grants to faith-based groups, government chaplains, prison activities, and discretionary exclusion of faith-based groups from government programs. [Thanks to Melissa Rogers for the lead.]
Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases
In Farnworth v. Craven, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88223 (D ID, Nov. 30, 2007), an Idaho federal magistrate judge refused to permit a prisoner, now on parole, to pursue a damage claim against the executive director of the Idaho Commission of Pardons and Parole. Plaintiff complained that he was required to attend a substance abuse program containing a religious component in order to gain eligibility for parole. The court concluded that defendant had absolute immunity from damage claims stemming from this exercise of discretion in imposing parole conditions.
In Georges v. Ricci, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89030 (D. NJ, Dec. 4, 2007), among numerous claims about his condition of confinement, plaintiff, without specifying his religious beliefs, alleged generally that he had been deprived of unspecified religious items and services. The court dismissed the claim, with leave to amend and refile it spelling out his claim more clearly.
In Kaufman v. Schneiter, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88880 (WD WI, Nov. 27, 2007), a Wisconsin federal district court dismissed for lack of standing an atheist prisoner’s Free Exercise claim challenging the policy that prevented inmates in the high security “step program” from receiving religious or other publications. The court also rejected an Establishment clause claim that the prison maintained a stock of Christian reading materials, but not reading materials on atheism. The court found that the prison official named in these charges had not been shown to have been involved in decisions not to stock atheist literature.
In Campbell v. Schriro, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89300 (D AZ, Nov. 21, 2007), and Arizona federal district court allowed a prisoner, a follower of the Avsarian religion, to proceed with a claim that a prison chaplain discriminated against him in not approving a vegetarian diet while approving such diets for Christian inmates who requested them. The court rejected plaintiff’s claims that the Arizona Department of Corrections negligently hired, supervised and trained its chaplains, and permitted Christian chaplains to assess the legitimacy of non-Christian religions. Plaintiff failed to allege facts supporting these claims.
In Roberson v. Woodford, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89253 (NC CA, Nov. 15, 2007), a California federal district court permitted a prisoner to proceed with a claim that he should receive time credit restoration and damages because he was unconstitutionally disciplined for wearing a beard as required by his religion. He claimed that prison grooming standards violated his rights under the free exercise clause and RLUIPA.
Friday, December 07, 2007
New York Principal Demoted For Using School Funds For Santeria Ceremony
Florida High Court Refuses Review Of School Chaplain's Confidentiality Breach
Creationist Sues After Firing For Refusing To Work On Part of NIH Grant Project
New Institute Trains Christian Students To Engage Secular Society
8th Circuit Enjoins MO's Funeral Picketing Law; KS Law Argued in State Supreme Court
Phelps alleges members of her church believe God is punishing America for what WBC considers the sin of homosexuality by killing Americans, including soldiers. As part of her religious duties, she believes she must protest and picket at certain funerals, including the funerals of United States soldiers, to publish the church's religious message: that God's promise of love and heaven for those who obey him in this life is counterbalanced by God's wrath and hell for those who do not. Phelps believes funerals are the only place where her religious message can be delivered in a timely and relevant manner.In Phelps-Roper v. Nixon, (8th Cir., Dec. 6, 2007), the court held that plaintiff had demonstrated a fair chance of prevailing on the merits of her claim, and so was entitled to a preliminary injunction while the constitutionality of the statute is being thoroughly reviewed. Treating the statute as content-neutral and thus subject to intermediate scrutiny, the court questioned how important an interest the state has in protecting individuals from unwanted speech directed at them outside of their home. It said that plaintiff has a fair chance of proving that the Missouri statute is not narrowly tailored or is facially overbroad, and that it does not leave open ample alternative channels of communication. The court relied particularly on its 1999 decision in Olmer v. Lincoln enjoining enforcement of a law banning picketing of churches immediately before, during and after a scheduled religious activity. The AP yesterday reported on the decision. [Thanks to How Appealing for the lead.]
Meanwhile, AP reports that yesterday morning the Kansas Supreme Court heard arguments in another funeral-picketing-law case. Kansas placed a provision in its anti-funeral picketing statute, preventing it from going into effect until it was declared constitutional by the state Supreme Court or a federal court. The provision was included in order to prevent Westboro Baptist Church from becoming a plaintiff in a case challenging the law, and potentially collecting attorneys' fees if successful. (AP) However now the Kansas Supreme court is questioning whether the judicial trigger is constitutional. The Kansas attorney general's office is arguing that the judicial trigger provision can be struck down and the remainder of the law enforced. (See prior related posting.)
Hate Crimes Provisions Stripped From Defense Bill, Dooming Passage This Year
President Speaks At National Christmas Tree Lighting
Each year at this time, we rejoice in the proclamation of good news, that in Bethlehem of Judea, a Savior was born. And we rejoice in the Christmas promise of peace to men of goodwill. We also reflect on the mystery of Christmas: the story of the Almighty, who entered history in the most vulnerable form possible -- hidden in the weakness of a newborn child. And we reflect on the call of our Creator -- who by taking this form, reminds us of our duty to protect and care for the weak and the vulnerable among us.
During this Christmas season, millions of Americans will answer this call by reaching out a compassionate hand to help brothers and sisters in need. We are thankful for these good souls who show the good heart of our nation. We're also thankful for the thousands of Americans who answer the call by serving our nation in uniform....
DC Church Unwillingly Gets Historical Status
UPDATE: The full text of the Becket Fund's letter, which focuses on the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act as well as RFRA, is now available online.
Florida Paper Criticizes Inspection Exemptions For Faith-Based Day Cares
Thursday, December 06, 2007
Romney Delivers Major Speech On Role Of His Faith In Any Future Presidency
Here is a video of Romney's full speech. [Thanks to Melissa Rogers for finding this link.] Meanwhile this morning's New York Times ran a front page article on one of Romney's challengers, Mike Huckabee, focusing in large part on Huckabee's experience as an evangelical pastor.There are some who may feel that religion is not a matter to be seriously considered in the context of the weighty threats that face us. If so, they are at odds with the nation's founders.... Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom....
Let me assure you that no authorities of my church, or of any other church for that matter, will ever exert influence on presidential decisions. Their authority is theirs, within the province of church affairs, and it ends where the affairs of the nation begin....
There are some for whom these commitments are not enough. They would prefer it if I would simply distance myself from my religion, say that it is more a tradition than my personal conviction, or disavow one or another of its precepts. That I will not do. I believe in my Mormon faith and I endeavor to live by it. My faith is the faith of my fathers – I will be true to them and to my beliefs....
There is one fundamental question about which I often am asked. What do I believe about Jesus Christ? I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of mankind. My church's beliefs about Christ may not all be the same as those of other faiths. Each religion has its own unique doctrines and history. These are not bases for criticism but rather a test of our tolerance....
There are some who would have a presidential candidate describe and explain his church's distinctive doctrines. To do so would enable the very religious test the founders prohibited in the Constitution. No candidate should become the spokesman for his faith. For if he becomes President he will need the prayers of the people of all faiths.
I believe that every faith I have encountered draws its adherents closer to God. And in every faith I have come to know, there are features I wish were in my own: I love the profound ceremony of the Catholic Mass, the approachability of God in the prayers of the Evangelicals, the tenderness of spirit among the Pentecostals, the confident independence of the Lutherans, the ancient traditions of the Jews, unchanged through the ages, and the commitment to frequent prayer of the Muslims....
It is important to recognize that while differences in theology exist between the churches in America, we share a common creed of moral convictions. And where the affairs of our nation are concerned, it's usually a sound rule to focus on the latter – on the great moral principles that urge us all on a common course....
We separate church and state affairs in this country, and for good reason. No religion should dictate to the state nor should the state interfere with the free practice of religion. But in recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning. They seek to remove from the public domain any acknowledgment of God. Religion is seen as merely a private affair with no place in public life. It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America – the religion of secularism. They are wrong.
The founders proscribed the establishment of a state religion, but they did not countenance the elimination of religion from the public square. We are a nation "Under God" and in God, we do indeed trust....
Perhaps the most important question to ask a person of faith who seeks a political office, is this: does he share these American values: the equality of human kind, the obligation to serve one another, and a steadfast commitment to liberty?...
I'm not sure that we fully appreciate the profound implications of our tradition of religious liberty.... The establishment of state religions in Europe did no favor to Europe's churches. And though you will find many people of strong faith there, the churches themselves seem to be withering away.
Infinitely worse is the other extreme, the creed of conversion by conquest: violent Jihad, murder as martyrdom... killing Christians, Jews, and Muslims with equal indifference. These radical Islamists do their preaching not by reason or example, but in the coercion of minds and the shedding of blood. We face no greater danger today than theocratic tyranny, and the boundless suffering these states and groups could inflict if given the chance.