Court Holds Several Liable In Challenge To Faith-Based Rehab Placement

Hanas v. Inner City Christian Outreach, Inc., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15472 (ED MI, Feb. 29, 2008) is a suit in federal district court in Michigan in which Joseph Hanas, who pled guilty to possession of marijuana, challenged a court's placement of him in a faith-based rehabilitation program operated by Inner City Christian Outreach (ICCO). ICCO staff prevented Hanas from practicing Catholicism and forced him to participate in Pentecostal worship and Bible studies. The suit sought a declaratory judgment and damages against ICCO, its pastor, a Drug Court social worker and a Drug Court consultant. The court held that most of the defendants were liable for Establishment Clause and Free Exercise violations.

Turkish Court Rules That Religion Classes Are Not Compulsory

Turkey's Council of State ruled yesterday that students may be excused from religion courses as they are currently offered in Turkey's schools. Today's Zaman reports on the court's ruling in a case brought by the father of a seventh grader. Explaining the ruling, the 8th Chamber of the Council of State said: "It is stated in Article 24 of the Constitution that primary, secondary and high school students are obliged to attend classes on religion, culture and morality. But these classes cannot be considered classes on culture and morality in terms of their content. Thus, it is not against the law to allow students' parents to decide whether they should attend these classes." Today's International Herald Tribune reports that plaintiffs in the case were an Alevi family who objected to their children being forced to attend Sunni-oriented classes. It continues: "The ruling is likely to please the European Union which has made religious liberties a condition for Turkey's membership bid. The EU has been pressing Turkey to address Alevi claims, including difficulties opening their houses of worship and obtaining state funds for religious facilities." (See prior related posting.)

Ohio Muslims Tend To Support Obama In Primary

As a crucial Presidential primaries are held in Ohio and Texas today, BBC News reports that Muslims in Ohio tend to be supporting Barack Obama. The article foucses primarily on the 60,000 Muslims who live in Cleveland.

Church of England Is Concerned About Proposal To Abolish Blasphemy Laws

Today's London Guardian reports that the archbishops of the Church of England have "serious reservations" about the method and timing of government proposals to abolish Britain's blasphemy laws. In a joint letter, the archbishops of Canterbury and York said that while they have supported repeal in the right context, they fear that the present move could be seen as a move toward secularization or as an invitation to attack or insult religion. (See prior related posting.)

UN Report On Religious Freedom In Britain Released

Religious Intelligence reported yesterday that the United Nation's Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief has prepared a report on religious freedom in Britain. While finding a high degree of freedom, the report indicated a number of issues that remain. Muslim groups consider the government's anti-terrorism policy to be discriminatory. The continued existence of Britain's blasphemy law was criticized. Jewish groups complained of increased anti-Semitism; Hindus objected to an educational curriculum that favors Urdu over Hindu; Sikhs want proportional representation by religion in parliament. Some Christian groups object to policies and rules prohibiting discrimination against gays and lesbians.

Univeristy of South Carolina Student Organization Funding Challenged

Last Thursday, the Christian Legal Society at the University of South Carolina filed suit against the University challenging a University rule that makes recognized student religious organizations ineligible for general funding from student activity fees. Religious groups may only apply for special funding for content neutral programs. The federal court complaint (full text) alleges that the University rule amounts to unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination and violates CLS's free exercise rights. A release issued Sunday by the Alliance Defense Fund says that "instead of formally serving the complaint filed with the court, ADF and CLS attorneys sent a courtesy copy to university officials with a letter requesting that they correct the unconstitutional policy within two weeks."

Malaysian Churches Are Entering Politics

According to today's Boston Globe, in Malaysia, Christian churches are becoming involved in this week end's upcoming elections. Churches are urging Christians to back candidates who promote religious freedom. The Christian Federation of Malaysia is encouraging Christians to vote for candidates whose policies "reflect God's standard and Christian values." Many Christians are worried about a perceived Islamization of national life in Malaysia.

Arizona Case Makes Canon Law Relevant To Former Priest's Fraud Defense

In Arizona, prosecutors are deciding whether to again charge former Roman Catholic priest Dennis Riccitelli with fraud. Phoenix's East Valley Tribune reported yesterday that a judge's prior dismissal of the case requires prosecutors to tell any new grand jury that they must consider canon law in deciding whether to indict. Riccitelli was charged with using church real estate and funds to benefit himself. His lawyers, however, argued that under canon law a priest has the right to spend his church's money as he sees fit. Last year Maricopa County Judge Silvia Arellano ruled that church law and policies are directly relevant to whether Riccitelli committed fraud. State appellate courts have refused to review the decision. Prosecutors are concerned that the case will invite other defendants to use religious law to justify criminal conduct.

Two Courts Are Reviewing Revocation of Property Tax Exemptions

Two different courts last week focused on when an organization meets the standards for a property tax exemption as a religious or charitable non-profit institution. In Urbana, Illinois, a county court ruled that Provena Covenant Medical Center's lawsuit seeking an immediate property tax refund should be permitted to continue. After the state ruled that the property tax exemption for the Catholic hospital should be revoked, the hospital sued. A Sangamon County court ruled the hospital qualifies for the exemption as both a religious and charitable organization. The Department of Revenue is appealing that ruling and claims that it is not required to refund past taxes to the hospital until appeals have been exhausted. Covenant sued for an immediate refund. The Urbana News-Gazette reported last Thursday that in holding that this suit could continue, the court urged the state to give "serious thought" to making the refund and to stop spending taxpayer money on litigation.

Meanwhile, Friday's Roanoke (VA) Times reported that the Virginia Supreme Court has agreed to hear an appeal by The Glebe, a Baptist retirement facility, that is attempting to overturn the revocation of its property tax exemption. Last year a state circuit court ruled that the religious and benevolent exemption granted in 1976 by the Virginia legislature to Virginia Baptist Homes applies to land held in the name of VBH only if the specific property is used for religious or benevolent purposes. (See prior posting.) The county contends that The Glebe is a resort for wealthy retirees that provides no charitable or religious services to its residents. VBS says that eventually the facility will offer reduced rates.

Recent Articles and Book of Interest

From SSRN:

• Mark Glouberman, Of Mice and Men: God and the Canadian Supreme Court, (Ratio Juris, Vol. 21, Issue 1, pp. 107-124, March 2008).


• Christopher J. Buccafusco, Spiritualism and Will(s) in the Age of Contract, (February 21, 2008).

From NELLCO:

• Marc O. DeGirolami, The Constitutional Paradox of Religious Learning, (Columbia Law School. Columbia Public Law & Legal Theory Working Papers, February 23, 2008).

From SmartCILP:

• Symposium: A Second-Class Constitutional Right? Free Exercise and the Current State of Religious Freedom in the United States. Opening remarks by Vincent Martin Bonventre; articles by Michael P. Moreland, Gary J. Simson, Luke Meier, Timothy A. Byrnes, Richard A. Hesse and Steven K. Green. 70 Albany Law Review 1399-1472 (2007).


• John M. Breen, The Air in the Balloon: Further Notes on Catholic and Jesuit Identity in Legal Education, 43 Gonzaga Law Review 41-75 (2007/08).


• Nathan A. Forrester Jr., Equal Billing: On Religion, Washington's Views Should Be Considered, Too. (Reviewing Tara Ross & Joseph C. Smith Jr., Under God: George Washington and the Question of Church and State.) 12 Texas Review of Law and Politics 207-221 (2007).


• Mark Strasser, Marriage, Free Exercise, and the Constitution, 26 Law & Inequality 59-108 (2008).


• Willett, Hon. Don R. An Inconvenient Truth: Conservatives Behaving Charitably. (Reviewing Arthur C. Brooks, Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism.) 12 Texas Review of Law & Politics 181-205 (2007).


• Symposium: The Religion Clauses in the 21st Century. Introduction by William P. Marshall, Vivian E. Hamilton and John E. Taylor; articles by Steven G. Gey, Douglas Laycock, Ira C. Lupu, Robert W. Tuttle, Steven K. Green, Kristi L. Bowman, John E. Taylor, Frederick Mark Gedicks, Roger Hendrix, Steven D. Smith, Daniel O. Conkle, Kent Greenawalt, Carl H. Esbeck, Angela C. Carmella, Laura S. Underkuffler, Naomi Cahn, June Carbone, Vivian E. Hamilton and Eduardo M. Penalver. 110 West Virginia Law Review i-vii, 1-544 (2007).

New Book:

• Martha Nussbaum, Liberty of Conscience, (Basic Books, Feb. 2008), reviewed in the New York Sun and the New York Times. [Updated & corrected].

Pope, New U.S. Ambassador, Exchange Greetings

Last Friday, according to Catholic News Service, Mary Ann Glendon, the new U.S. Ambassador to the Vatican presented her credentials to Pope Benedict XVI. In her remarks (full text), Ambassador Glendon said: "An essential element of strong friendship is ongoing conversation -- a dialogue -- based on mutual respect, understanding and trust. This is particularly true for people of faith. The United States, in its desire to be a partner in interfaith dialogue, is working to amplify the many voices speaking out against the misuse of religion to promote terrorist violence and to support the efforts of those who are striving for greater interfaith understanding."

The Pope, responding (full text) to Glendon's remarks, said in part: "The American people’s historic appreciation of the role of religion in shaping public discourse and in shedding light on the inherent moral dimension of social issues -- a role at times contested in the name of a straitened understanding of political life and public discourse -- is reflected in the efforts of so many of your fellow-citizens and government leaders to ensure legal protection for God’s gift of life from conception to natural death, and the safeguarding of the institution of marriage, acknowledged as a stable union between a man and a woman, and that of the family."

Do Too Many Churches Hurt Retailing?

Today's New York Times, in an article titled God's Row, explores the question of whether too many store front churches in an area injure commerce by limiting the seven-day-a-week street traffic that is important to retailers.

Injunction Denied In Land Use Dispute Over Church Social Service Facilities

In Calvert County, Maryland last week, a state Circuit court judge denied the county's request for a preliminary injunction to close down a church's counseling center and food pantry that have not obtained proper permits and site plans. Today's Washington Post reports on the decision. A suit is pending in federal court claiming that RLUIPA protects the church from having to close off its driveway as the county demands. (See prior posting.) Closing the driveway will force social service clients to go through the church to obtain assistance.

California Court Finds No Free Exercise Right To Home School Children

In In re Rachel L., (CA Ct. App., Feb. 28, 2008), a California state appellate court rejected the claim by parents that they have a First Amendment right to home school their children because of their sincerely held religious beliefs "based on Biblical teachings and principles". The court held that assertions of this kind of general religious justification are conclusional and not factually specific. It added that "such sparse representations are too easily asserted by any parent who wishes to home school his or her child."

Proving Jewish Lineage To Israeli Rabbinate Can Create Problems

Today's New York Times Magazine carries an article on the problems faced by Israelis who need to prove to Israel's official Rabbinate that they are Jewish so that they can marry in Israel. The article profiles Rabbi Seth Farber who founded Itim, an organization to help. The article reports that Farber:

decided to "create a place where the representatives of Judaism" aren't government clerks. Itim distributes booklets that explain to Israelis how to arrange a circumcision, marriage or funeral. It helps secular couples find rabbis sensitive to their desires for their ceremonies. For the last five years, it has run a hot line for Israelis who face trouble in the rabbinic bureaucracy. Early on, Farber began receiving calls from people unable to prove they were Jews. Many were immigrants from the former Soviet Union, but some were Americans. Even a letter from an Orthodox rabbi didn't always help. The state rabbinate no longer trusts all Orthodox rabbis.

Canadian Judge Upholds Undercover Officer's Disguise As Religious Advisor

Canada's National Post yesterday carried a long article about a police sting operation in which an undercover agent disguised himself as a religious spiritual advisor in order to obtain an incriminating confession from a suspect. The article claims this is the first case of its kind in the Western world. At issue is a Brampton, Ontario police operation investigating a series of gang shootings in which an agent pretended to be an Obeah shaman, empowered with magic. The undercover agent obtained the confidence of the mother of one of the suspects, and at meetings with her and her son, he obtained confessions leading to charges against the son for being the getaway driver and giving a gun to the shooter in a murder.

In the defendant's trial in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Justice Terrence O'Connor agreed that Obeah is a religious belief system protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. He also agreed that the undercover agent interfered with defendant Evol Robinson's religious practices. However he concluded that Robinson was not constrained or coerced in his religious practice because the interference was insubstantial. He was not prevented from worshiping or expressing himself spiritually. Further, O'Connor ruled, given the pressing concern about violent gun crimes, society's benefit from the sting operation outweighs the interference with religion.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Pressley v. Beard, (3d Cir., Feb. 26, 2008), the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district court decision rejecting plaintiff prisoner's claim that his free exercise rights were violated when prison officials confiscated his hard-bound Koran, prayer rug, and kufi.

In Scott v. Sisto, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13349 (ED CA, Feb. 8, 2008), a California federal district court permitted a Muslim prisoner to proceed with free exercise and RLUIPA challenges to prison policy that limits him to a vegetarian diet and does not offer Halal food. Plaintiff alleges that under Islamic law, Muslims are not permitted to be vegetarians. Plaintiff's equal protection and due process claims were rejected.

In Strope v. Cummings, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13682 (D KA, Feb. 22, 2008), a Kansas federal district court dismissed a claim by a prisoner that his Free Exercise rights and his rights under RLUIPA were violated when a prison guard interrupted him two or three times while he was kneeling and praying in his cell, asking him whether he was all right. The court noted that plaintiff may proceed on a number of other claims, including interference with religious call-out times and spoiled kosher food.

In Christiansen v. Walker, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14147 (SD IL, Feb. 26, 2008), an Illinois federal district judge adopted a magistrate's recommendations that a default judgment be entered against one of the defendants charged with infringing plaintiff prisoner's free exercise of religion. Plaintiff claimed he was not served a vegetarian diet, was not given adequate time and space for prayer and was forced to attend Christian religious programs. The court ordered the magistrate judge to conduct a hearing on damages. (See prior related posting.)

In Low v. Stanton, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14491 (ED CA, Feb. 26, 2008), plaintiff complained that while he was a pre-trial detainee, jail officials refused to furnish him a copy of the Quran in Arabic, offering him instead only an English translation. The jail furnishes Arabic versions (that are more expensive) only to inmates who are fluent in Arabic. In this decision, a California federal magistrate judge recommended granting summary judgment to defendants on plaintiff's Establishment Clause and equal protection claims, but permitting plaintiff to proceed on his Free Exercise and RLUIPA claims.

In Walls v. Schriro, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14539 (D AZ, Feb. 26, 2008), a Hare Krishna prisoner alleged that his rights under the First Amendment and RLUIPA were being violated when he was denied a proper religious diet, a religious hairstyle, religious services and visitations. An Arizona federal district court granted defendants' motion for summary judgment on the claim regarding religious visits and services. It also held that defendants had qualified immunity from damage claims under RLUIPA as to plaintiff's other allegations. However the court permitted plaintiff to move ahead with his other claims.

In Whitfield v. Lawrence Correctional Center, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14945 (SD IL, Feb. 27, 2008), an "African Hebrew Israelite" prisoner claimed he was denied religious services and programs and adequate meals that comply with his religious beliefs. He also argued that African Hebrew Israelites receive an insufficient share of religious programming funds. Finally he alleges he was forced to receive a "T.B. shot" while he was observing the Sabbath. An Illinois federal district court permitted plaintiff to move ahead with ten of his 13 claims.

In Oakes v. Green, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15106 (ED KY, Feb. 27, 2008), a Kentucky federal district court rejected an inmate's First Amendment and RLUIPA challenges to prison grooming regulations.

ACLU Sues Louisiana School Board Challenging ADF's Model Prayer Policy

The ACLU of Louisiana announced yesterday that for the seventh time it has filed a lawsuit against Tangipahoa Parish School Board and its members, this time challenging the Board's policy on opening school board meetings with prayer. The federal court complaint (full text) challenges under the Establishment Clause the Board's policy which invites clergy in local congregations, on a first-come first-served basis, to lead an opening prayer before the formal opening of the Board meeting. An ACLU challenge to the Board's earlier prayer policy was dismissed by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals on standing grounds because there was no evidence in the record that plaintiffs ever attended a school board meeting where a prayer was recited. (See prior posting.) Plaintiff in the new case is a taxpayer, voter, father of two children enrolled in the local schools, and attends board meetings.

The AP yesterday reporting on the lawsuit said that the complaint "describes three board meetings at which ministers from different Christian denominations made Christian prayers. It also says [plaintiff's] wife asked ... if she could give an invocation, but was told that was reserved for ministers of congregations or police or fire department chaplains — and that being "nondenominational" would also bar her...."

This suit may have more than local significance as the policy being challenged is a Model Prayer Policy that the Alliance Defense Fund has recommended to school boards and city councils around the country. (ADF release.)

Columnist Urges Stronger Obama Reaction To Claims He Is Muslim

Naomi Klein, writing in today's Guardian, criticizes Barack Obama for an insufficient response to campaign tactics that suggest he is a Muslim. In an op-ed titled It's No Slur To Be Called a Muslim, she says:

What is disturbing about the campaign's response is that it leaves unchallenged the disgraceful and racist premise behind the entire "Muslim smear": that being Muslim is de facto a source of shame.... Substitute another faith or ethnicity, and you'd expect a very different response....

As the most visible target of this rising racism, Obama has the power to be more than its victim. He can use the attacks to begin the very process of global repair that is the most seductive promise of his campaign. The next time he's asked about his alleged Muslimness, Obama can respond not just by clarifying the facts but by turning the tables. He can state that while a liaison with a pharmaceutical lobbyist may be worthy of scandalised exposure, being a Muslim is not.

Gay Pride Protesters Convicted of Disorderly Conduct

A City Judge in Elmira, New York has rejected First Amendment defenses and found four anti-gay demonstrators guilty of disorderly conduct. Each was fined $95 and assessed $100 in court costs. Today's Elmira Star-Gazette reports that the charges grew out of protests at a Gay Pride Festival. The four--wearing red T-shirts with the slogans "Liberated from Sin" and "By the Blood of Jesus"-- were arrested after laying down on the lawn in front of a stage. In his closing argument, Assistant District Attorney Robert Siglin argued that the case is not about religious freedom, but about public order.