Objective coverage of church-state and religious liberty developments, with extensive links to primary sources.
Friday, April 11, 2008
House Resolution Welcomes Pope Benedict To U.S.
The U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday passed H. Res. 838, welcoming Pope Benedict XVI on his first apostolic visit to the United States which begins next Tuesday. The resolution sets out many highlights of the Pope's life and religious career. Most of the events during the Pope's 6-day visit to New York and Washington will be streamed live (and then archived) at www.uspapalvisit.org.
Refusal To Photograph Lesbian Commitment Ceremony Held Discriminatory
In Willock v. Elane Photography, LLC, (NM Hum. Rts. Comm., April 9, 2008), the New Mexico Human Rights Commission held that a photography company violated the New Mexico Human Rights Act prohibition on sexual orientation discrimination when one of its husband and wife owners refused to to photograph a same-sex commitment ceremony. Sec. 28-1-7 of the Act prohibits any place of public accommodation from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation by refusing to offer services. An Alliance Defense Fund release says that photographer Elaine Huguenin refused to provide photography services because Christian beliefs held by her and her husband are in conflict with the message communicated by the ceremony. The Commission awarded $6,637 in attorneys fees and costs to Vanessa Willock who filed the complaint. ADF says the ruling will be appealed. (See prior related posting.)
Another Affidavit Released In FLDS Search; Federal Agents Apparently Also Involved
More information has come out on the much-publicized raid of the FLDS Compound in Eldorado, Texas. (See prior posting.) The full text of the affidavit of a Texas Ranger that was filed to request a search warrant for the Temple on the FLDS premises has been released. (See prior related posting.) The Affidavit, dated April 6, sought a subsequent search warrant after authorities learned about the Temple while conducting a search of the YFZ Ranch under an initial narrower warrant.
Still unclear is a report in today's International Herald Tribune indicating that federal officials are involved in the search as well. This was revealed when lawyers for FLDS had asked a state court judge to prevent the Temple search, arguing that "Members of the religious denomination occupying the community consider it a desecration of one of their holiest sites for a non-member to enter their temple." State District Court Judge Barbara Walther, however, said that she had no authority to stop a federal search of the property. FLDS lawyer Gerald Goldstein had said in court that he was aware that federal agents were searching the ranch. The Herald Tribune article also gives more details on the actual search of the Temple. FLDS leaders refused to unlock the Temple or provide keys to it because this would be aiding in the desecration of their place of worship. After several less drastic means failed, authorities broke down the Temple's doors.
UPDATE: The AP on Friday published a profile of Gerald Goldstein (bio from law firm website) who is acting as counsel for the FLDS. Goldstein is a respected criminal defense lawyer and a past president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. For 11 years he served as an adjunct professor at the University of Texas Law School and has served on the board of directors of the San Antonio Bar Association, among many other professional accomplishments.
UPDATE: The Houston Chronicle on Friday reported that Schleicher County Sheriff David Doran had been receiving information about the YFZ Ranch from an informant for four years. However it was not until a call from a 16-year old last week to a domestic violence hotline that law enforcement authorities felt they had sufficient cause to take action and the possibility of a cooperating witness.
Still unclear is a report in today's International Herald Tribune indicating that federal officials are involved in the search as well. This was revealed when lawyers for FLDS had asked a state court judge to prevent the Temple search, arguing that "Members of the religious denomination occupying the community consider it a desecration of one of their holiest sites for a non-member to enter their temple." State District Court Judge Barbara Walther, however, said that she had no authority to stop a federal search of the property. FLDS lawyer Gerald Goldstein had said in court that he was aware that federal agents were searching the ranch. The Herald Tribune article also gives more details on the actual search of the Temple. FLDS leaders refused to unlock the Temple or provide keys to it because this would be aiding in the desecration of their place of worship. After several less drastic means failed, authorities broke down the Temple's doors.
UPDATE: The AP on Friday published a profile of Gerald Goldstein (bio from law firm website) who is acting as counsel for the FLDS. Goldstein is a respected criminal defense lawyer and a past president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. For 11 years he served as an adjunct professor at the University of Texas Law School and has served on the board of directors of the San Antonio Bar Association, among many other professional accomplishments.
UPDATE: The Houston Chronicle on Friday reported that Schleicher County Sheriff David Doran had been receiving information about the YFZ Ranch from an informant for four years. However it was not until a call from a 16-year old last week to a domestic violence hotline that law enforcement authorities felt they had sufficient cause to take action and the possibility of a cooperating witness.
9th Circuit Says Bald Eagle Protection Does Not Violate RFRA
In United States v. Vasquez-Ramos, (9th Cir., April 10, 2008), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to dismiss criminal charges under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) against two defendants who claimed their prosecution violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). The court said that in a 2003 decision, United States v. Antoine, "we held that individuals like Defendants who are not members of federally-recognized tribes did not have valid claims that their prosecutions under BGEPA violate RFRA.... Neither removal of bald eagles from the Endangered or Threatened Species List, the Supreme Court's decision in O Centro Espirita, nor the government's eagle recovery methods undermine this holding."
7th Circuit Hears Arguments In Anti-Gay T-Shirt Case
Last Friday the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in Nuxoll v. Indian Prairie School District, (Case No. 08-1050). In the case, an Illinois federal district court held that "school officials may prohibit a public high school student from displaying negative statements about a category of persons, including homosexuals, that are inconsistent with the school's educational goal of promoting tolerance." (See prior posting.) At issue is a Christian high school student's desire to wear a T-shirt to school displaying the slogan "Be Happy, Not Gay". An AP story yesterday reported on the oral arguments. A recording of the full oral argument is available from the 7th circuit's website.
Taking Church by Eminent Domain Does Not Violate Florida's RFRA
In Christian Romany Church Ministries v. Broward County, (FL Ct. App., April 9, 2008), a Florida state appellate court held that Broward County did not violate the Florida Religious Freedom Restoration Act when it took a church's property through eminent domain. The county wanted the property as a location for a substance abuse facility. The court said: "The church's insistence that a specific church building for holding worship services is fundamental to religious exercise under the statute is unpersuasive.... There is nothing about this location that is unique or integral to the conduct of the religion."
Scalia's Speech Criticizes Court's Approach To 1st Amendment Religion Cases
In a speech at the University of Virginia Law School this week, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia took issue with the way in which a majority of the Supreme Court articulates its Establishment Clause doctrines. Yesterday's Hampton Roads (VA) Daily Press reports that in receiving the the Thomas Jefferson Medal in Law, Scalia said that Jefferson never intended to banish religion from government. Scalia argued that the abstract "principle of neutrality" set out in religion cases gives way when a court is faced with a long-standing tradition, such as prayer in legislative bodies.
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Interior Ministry Releases New Study of Muslims In Germany
Germany's Federal Ministry of the Interior has released a new study titled Muslime in Deutschland (Muslims In Germany). The English language summary of the 509 page study concludes:
[T]he great significance of religion for all Muslims in Germany is striking, as well as the high percentage of those who confess their religion in theory and practice. Fundamentalist religious orientations, however, are not synonymous with distance to democracy, and distance to democracy is not automatically a sign of the willingness to commit violence; other factors must be added here. It is, however, certainly the case that the seed of radicalism can be sown more easily in this ground of the basically aloof view of the Western way of life and society, a view that can change into extremism against the background of personally experienced marginalization or the sense of the worldwide oppression of Muslims. For this reason, the potential for danger is considerably greater than the modest membership figures in the known Islamic-extremist associations might suggest.
In Unusual Reversal, 6th Circuit Finds No Standing In High School Speech Code Case
Yesterday in Morrison v. Board of Education of Boyd County, (6th Cir., April 9, 2008), a 3-judge panel reversed itelf, issuing an amended opinion in a case it originally decided last October. (See prior posting.) In an unusual move, the panel decided to reconsider its prior ruling after defendants petitioned for an en banc rehearing. Also unusual, the deciding vote in granting the rehearing and changing the result was that of a district court judge sitting by designation on the Court of Appeals.
The case involved a challenge by a Christian high school student and his parents to the Boyd County (KY) High School's anti-harassment/ discrimination policy. Plaintiffs alleged that the speech codes in effect during the 2004-05 school year (and later changed) prevented Christian students from expressing their views that homosexuality is sinful, and that the speech codes and related anti-harassment training undermined students’ ability to practice their Christian faith. The majority, adopting the reasoning of the dissent in the original decision, held that since all that is at issue is nominal damages for a policy no longer in existence, plaintiffs lack standing. It concluded: "This case should be over. Allowing it to proceed to determine the constitutionality of an abandoned policy—in the hope of awarding the plaintiff a single dollar—vindicates no interest and trivializes the important business of the federal courts."
Judge Moore dissenting reiterated the position taken in her former majority opinion. She argued that plaintiffs have standing and that their claim is not moot. She would remand the case for a determination of whether the school's policy would have had a chilling effect on a "person of ordinary firmness."
The AP yesterday reported on the decision, noting that both the ACLU and the Alliance Defense Fund had supported plaintiff in the case.
The case involved a challenge by a Christian high school student and his parents to the Boyd County (KY) High School's anti-harassment/ discrimination policy. Plaintiffs alleged that the speech codes in effect during the 2004-05 school year (and later changed) prevented Christian students from expressing their views that homosexuality is sinful, and that the speech codes and related anti-harassment training undermined students’ ability to practice their Christian faith. The majority, adopting the reasoning of the dissent in the original decision, held that since all that is at issue is nominal damages for a policy no longer in existence, plaintiffs lack standing. It concluded: "This case should be over. Allowing it to proceed to determine the constitutionality of an abandoned policy—in the hope of awarding the plaintiff a single dollar—vindicates no interest and trivializes the important business of the federal courts."
Judge Moore dissenting reiterated the position taken in her former majority opinion. She argued that plaintiffs have standing and that their claim is not moot. She would remand the case for a determination of whether the school's policy would have had a chilling effect on a "person of ordinary firmness."
The AP yesterday reported on the decision, noting that both the ACLU and the Alliance Defense Fund had supported plaintiff in the case.
Ohio Episcopal Diocese Sues Break-Away Churches Over Title To Church Property
In another of the many battles between the Episcopal Church and break-away congregations, the Episcopal Diocese of Ohio has filed suit in Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court seeking a ruling that the parent Episcopal Church holds title to the properties of 5 dissident parishes. Yesterday's Cleveland Plain Dealer, reporting on the litigation, said that the parishes broke away in protest over the election of a gay bishop and other doctrinal matters.
Russia Plans To Draft Priests Into Military
The Russian News and Information Agency reports today that Russian Orthodox Church officials are concerned about a new law that came into effect this year which cancelled draft deferments for clergymen, seminary students, conscientious objectors and certain others. The government plans to draft 100 clergy this year. The Church's Canon law prohibits clergymen from entering military service other than as chaplains. They need to be technically defrocked in order to serve as soldiers. The armed forces however see the new law as a way to offset declining numbers in the military.
Delaware Prison Says No Bible Reading On The Job
Yesterday's Wilmington (DE) News Journal reports that a kitchen manager at the state's Webb Correctional Facility says his supervisor ordered him to remove the Bible he keeps on his desk and not to bring it back. Elizabeth Neal, acting warden at Webb, said the issue is employees' reading while on duty-- whether it is the Bible or anything else. Correction Commissioner Carl Danberg said the order mailed to employee William Parker by Food Service Director Emanuel Walker was "inartfully worded". Danberg promised that it "will be rescinded and modified and reissued to make it clear that the issue is not the content of the reading material, but the behavior."
Wednesday, April 09, 2008
Clergyman Debates Australian Justice Over Homosexuality
Today's Sydney Morning Herald reports on an unusual public exchange of recriminations between Reverend Richard Lane of Sydney's St. Stephen's Church and Australia High Court Justice Michael Kirby. In an ABC Radio interview last year, Kirby said that the Anglican and Catholic archbishops had made it difficult for people to adopt a more tolerant attitude toward gays. In a letter to Kirby, Rev. Lane denounced him for calling himself a Christian Anglican while living in an openly gay relationship . He warned him that he faces God's judgment, and encouraged him to open himself to "God's healing of homosexuality." Writing in reply, Justice Kirby said that Lane's biblical interpretation in not a universal one, and that the biblical quotations Lane used were unreliable mid-19th century translations.
Oklahoma Religious Freedom Act Trumps Tort Claims Act
In Shrum v. City of Coweta, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27930 (ED OK, March 28, 2008), an Oklahoma federal district court held that the Oklahoma Religious Freedom Act authorizes a religious discrimination claim against Coweta, Oklahoma's police chief in his indivdual capacity. The court held that the provision in the Oklahoma Governmental Tort Claims Act (O.S. Sec. 51-153) that precludes tort suits against individuals acting within the scope of their employment does not preclude a discrimination claim under the Religious Freedom Act. (See prior related posting.)
Excluding Juror Because of Clergy Spouse Held Proper
In Green v. Prosper, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18358 (CD CA, Feb. 28, 2008), a California federal district judge in a brief opinion adopted the report and recommendation of a federal magistrate judge denying a habeas corpus petition by a convicted felon who had unsuccessfully challenged his robbery conviction in state court. Defendant Demetrious Green claimed that the prosecution had improperly used one of its peremptory challenges to exclude the wife of a clergyman as a juror. The magistrate's opinion (2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96738) concluded that this did not amount to improper religious discrimination, saying: "the occupation of the potential juror's husband as a member of the clergy does not implicate the potential juror's religious beliefs and it is a credible non-racial basis to exercise a peremptory challenge."
British Christian Group To Sue Google Over Rejection of Online Ad
In Britain, the Christian Institute plans to file suit against Google challenging its refusal to sell the Institute a pay-per-click ad (text of proposed ad) that would be triggered by a Google search for the word "abortion". Yesterday Life Site News and a Christian Institute press release both reported details. The Google affiliate AdWords rejected the ad, telling the Institute: "Google policy does not permit the advertisement of websites that contain 'abortion and religion-related content'". (Full text of e-mail rejecting ad.) In its demand letter to Google, the Institute alleges that the refusal violates Britain's Equality Act 2006 which prohibits discrimination based on religious belief in the provision of goods and services.
Appeal Filed In Santeria Sacrifice Case
The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, representing Santeria priest Jose Merced (press release), yesterday filed an appeal with the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in Merced v. City of Euless. (See prior postings 1, 2.) In the case, a Texas federal district court upheld a decision by the the City of Euless to deny Merced a permit to sacrifice a goat. The animal slaughter was to be part of a Santeria religious ceremony. Today's Houston Chronicle covers the story.
Affidavit In FLDS Child-Custody Proceedings Released By Court
Media stories yesterday and today (New York Times, Fort Worth Star-Telegram ) gave wide coverage to an affidavit (full text) filed in Sleicher County, Texas District Court in which an investigative supervisor for the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services describes the phone calls by a 16-year old inside the FLDS ranch near San Angelo, Texas that led to the much publicized raid on the compound. While the affidavit describes the facts that were presented last week to the court to obtain a search warrant, this affidavit is the one filed in order to obtain a court order for temporary custody of the 416 children who have been removed from the site, pending an April 17 hearing. (San Angelo Standard-Times). The affidavit, dated April 6, also briefly describes interviews with children by authorities after they entered the YFZ Ranch. (See prior related posting.)
UPDATE: Today's Salt Lake Tribune reports that officials are asking the court to order genetic testing to proveparentage of the 419 children from YFZ Ranch now in state custody. They want parents to pay retroactive support for the children.
UPDATE: Today's Salt Lake Tribune reports that officials are asking the court to order genetic testing to proveparentage of the 419 children from YFZ Ranch now in state custody. They want parents to pay retroactive support for the children.
Tuesday, April 08, 2008
FLDS Church Is Challenging Search Warrant; Wants Searh of Temple Banned
Attorneys for the FLDS Church have filed papers challenging the continuing execution of the search warrant at the group's YFZ Ranch near San Angelo, Texas. Some 401 children have been removed from the ranch and placed into temporary state custody. (See prior posting.) Today's Deseret Morning News reports that 12 attorneys have been hired to represent the Church in a hearing scheduled for tomorrow afternoon. The Church argues that the search is illegal because authorities had insufficient "probable cause" for the search warrant that was issued. Attorneys particularly argue that irreparable injury would be caused by any search of the FLDS temple at the ranch. They contend: "The temple is one of the holiest sites in the community to the religious denomination living there. Members ... consider it a desecration of one of their holiest sites for a non-member to enter the temple. Similar to the concept of unringing a bell, how would law enforcement propose to undesecrate the temple in a community should the search later be found to have been illegal?"
Scientology Demands Its Confidential Documents Be Removed From Wikileak
A law firm representing the Church of Scientology has demanded that the website Wikileaks remove the full unedited version of the Church of Scientology's Operating Thetan (OT) documents that it has posted online. M-Net today reports that this 612-page "bible" of Scientology-- titled The Technical Bulletins of Dianetics and Scientology-- is normally restricted to top-ranking Scientology members. Wikileaks says it will release more Scientology documents next week. An e-mail demand letter (full text) from the Los Angeles law firm of Moxon & Kobrin says that Wikileaks is violating the Church's copyright in posting OT, which the letter describes as "confidential Advanced Technology of the Scientology religion." Wikileaks is set up to permit individuals to anonymously post confidential documents in an untraceable manner. It press release in response to the demand letter says it will not comply with the "legally abusive" request.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)