Ruling on Release of Secret Service Records Found Not Yet Appealable

Yesterday, in a case seeking release of White House visitor records, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals held that a district court order issued last December is neither an appealable final order, nor is it an appealable interlocutory order. In Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, (D DC, July 11, 2008), the court held the lower court's determination that Secret Service visitor logs are "agency records" under the Freedom of Information Act does not end the case because the government can still assert that various exemptions are applicable. At issue is an attempt by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington to learn how often nine prominent conservative Christian leaders visited the White House or the Vice President’s office. AP reports on the decision. (See prior related posting).

"Mahr" Held Not A Valid Pre-Nuptial Agreement

In Zawahiri v. Alwattar, (OH Ct. App., July 10, 2008), an Ohio court of appeals affirmed a Columbus, Ohio domestic relations court's refusal, in a divorce action between a Muslim couple, to enforce the "mahr" (dowry). Under Islamic law, the mahr must be part of the marriage contract. The mahr, signed by the bride and groom during the wedding ceremony, included an agreement for husband Mohammad Zawahiri to pay his wife, Raghad Alwattar, $25,000 in case of divorce or Zawahiri's death. The trial court refused to enforce the mahr, holding that the Establishment Clause of the Ohio Constitution bars it from enforcing a contract that requires performance of a religious act. The trial court also held that the mahr was not a valid pre-nuptial agreement. The court of appeals held that the mahr contract— rushed into just hours before the wedding ceremony-- is not a valid pre-nuptial agreement. That being the case, the court said that the Establishment Clause challenge is moot.

France Denies Muslim Woman Citizenship Because of Her Non-French Values

Last month, France's Council of State issued a decision upholding the denial of French citizenship to a Muslim woman because of her fundamentalist religious practices. The Council, France’s highest administrative tribunal, said that Faiza Maabchour’s lifestyle is "not compatible with the essential values of the French community, notably the principle of gender equality." The 32-year old woman covers herself from head to toe in a burqa. Social service reports say she lives in "total submission" to her husband. Apparently she is the first person denied French citizenship on the grounds of cultural behavior. Lengthy reports on the case are carried today by UAE's The National, Britain's Guardian, and the Wall Street Journal.

Mention of Satanism Held Not Enough To Reverse Priest's Murder Conviction

In State of Ohio v. Robinson, (OH Ct. App., July 11, 2008), an Ohio state appellate court affirmed the conviction of former Catholic priest Gerald Robinson who, in 2006, was convicted of a bizarre 1980 murder of a nun. Sister Margaret Ann Pahl's body was found in the sacristy of a Catholic hospital in Toledo, Ohio, strangled and then stabbed 31 times. Investigators eventually found 9 stab wounds to her chest were made through an altar cloth in the shape of an upside down cross. In a 95-page opinion, the court rejected eight challenges to Robinson's conviction, including a claim that the state improperly injected "Satanism" into the trial through the testimony of expert witness, Father Jeffrey Grob. Robinson argued that the state tried to stereotype him as an "Antichrist" and establish that there was "a satanic motivation" for the murder. However, closely examining the evidence, the court held that this was not the state’s theory. Rather Father Grob saw the crime scene as displaying an attempt to mock Sister Pahl’s life of devotion to Christ. Today’s Toledo Blade reports on the decision.

Court Rejects Amish Free Exercise Challenge to Buggy Emblem Requirement

A story from the Paducah Sun reports today that in Mayfield, Kentucky, a state circuit court judge upheld the conviction of three Amish men for refusing to display slow-moving vehicle emblems on their horse-drawn buggies. The court, in its decision on Thursday, held that the requirement is a neutral law of general application, not specifically directed at the Amish, so it does not violate the defendants' free exercise rights. [Revised]

UPDATE: AP reports on July 12 that the ACLU will defend another group of similar charges against Amish men in Mayfield.

Israeli Prison Rabbis Report Successes In Obtaining "Gets" For Wives

In Israel, government authorities are taking strong action against estranged husbands who refuse to sign a "get" (Jewish divorce document) granting their wives a religious divorce. In some cases, religious courts order the men to jail until they sign. Rabbis in the Israel Prison Service say they have been successful recently in convincing four husbands to sign. Arutz Sheva reports today that "a new arrangement that could help is being pursued, in the form of a special room in the prison where rabbinical court representatives will be able to arrange a get. This will avoid the trip to the courtroom in which prisoners sometimes change their minds."

British Registrar Wins Right To Refuse To Perform Civil Partnership Ceremonies

Times Online today reports on a decision by a British employment tribunal vindicating claims by civil marriage registrar Lillian Ladele who was "treated like a pariah" by fellow-emplyees after she refused on religious grounds to perform same-sex civil partnership ceremonies. The ruling said that Islington council wrongly "placed a greater value on the rights of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transsexual community than it placed on the rights of Ms Ladele as one holding an orthodox Christian belief." It found that Ladele's colleagues created "an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment" for Ladele. A further hearing on damages is scheduled for September. (See prior related posting.)

UPDATE: Here is the full text of the employment tribunal's decision in Ladele v. London Borough of Islingon. [Thanks to the Christian Institute for posting it and to the Anonymous comment to this post for the lead.]

UPDATE: The National Secular Society reported on July 18 that the Islington Council plans to appeal the employment tribunal ruling.

Alleged Biased Remarks By Clinic Director Are Part of Lawsuit

In Gordon v. Dalrymple, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51863 (D NV, July 8, 2008), a Nevada federal district court dismissed a free exercise and First Amendment retaliation claim by Allan Gordon, the former director of a state mental health clinic, who alleged he had been fired because of remarks he allegedly made critical of Christians. The court found that Gordon's dismissal resulted, instead, from four sexual harassment complaints against him. However the court allowed Gordon to move to trial on his defamation claim against staff psychologist Ronald Dalrymple who had written a complaint letter alleging, among other things, that Gordon created a hostile work environment by slandering Christians and that Gordon had a narcissistic personality disorder. An internal investigation found no evidence that Gordon had discriminated against Christians.

7th Circuit Holds Condo Mezuzah Ban Does Not Violate Fair Housing Act

In Bloch v. Frischholz, (7th Cir., July 10, 2008), the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in a 2-1 decision held that the federal Fair Housing Act does not bar a Chicago condominium association from adopting a rule that effectively prevents any Jewish resident from placing a mezuzah on his or her door. The Shoreline Towers Condominium Association adopted a rule prohibiting objects or signs of any kind on the outside of owners' doors. Three years after the rule was adopted, it was applied to require owners to remove mezuzot. Subsequently the condominium adopted a religious exception to the rule, but plaintiffs sought damages and an injunction to prevent a future return to the old ban. The majority, in an opinion by Judge Easterbrook, said that effectively the lawsuit was seeking a religious exception to a neutral rule, and that failure to make an exception does not amount to discrimination. The court therefore affirmed the trial court's grant of summary judgment to defendants.

Judge Wood dissenting said that plaintiffs are claiming religious discrimination, and that a reasonable interpretation of the facts is that the rule was not neutral. Instead its purpose was to discriminate against Jewish condo owners. She argues that a ban on mezuzot amounts to a constructive eviction for observant Jewish residents. In her view, the Fair Housing Act's ban on discrimination in the sale or rental of residential housing is not restricted to activities prior to sale. Yesterday's New York Sun reports on the decision. (See prior related posting.)

As discussed in the court's opinion, now both the city of Chicago and the state of Illinois have legal provisions assuring condo owners the right to place religious symbols on doors. [Thanks to Nicole Neroulias for the lead.]

Legal Maneuvers Ahead of Realignment Vote By Pittsburgh Episcopal Diocese

In Pittsburgh (PA), Episcopal Bishop Robert Duncan has moved up the date for the the annual Diocesan Convention to October 4, at which time delegates will vote on three resolutions (full text) that would withdraw the Pittsburgh diocese from the Episcopal Church and affiliate it with the more conservative Anglican Province of the Southern Cone. In advance of that vote, a number of legal maneuvers have taken place. One parish, Calvary Episcopal Church, has been challenging Duncan's move since it filed a lawsuit in state court in 2003. Episcopal News Service yesterday reported on the complicated developments.

In its lawsuit, Calvary (in 2005) obtained a court order prohibiting the diocese from transferring any property to any entity outside the Episcopal Church. So this April, Duncan formed a new Pennsylvania corporation named the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh, apparently intending to have it take custody of diocese assets if the realignment is approved. (Episcopal News Service, July 11). In response, Calvary has filed a petition with the court asking it to appoint a monitor to assure that its 2005 order is being complied with, or alternatively, giving Calvary's attorney access to the financial books and records of the diocese. Meanwhile, Progressive Episcopalians of Pittsburgh, a group opposing Duncan's moves, has issued a document titled Frequently Asked Questions About Realignment.

Obama Campaign's Religious Affairs Director Profiled

Today's Boston Globe profiles 25-year old Joshua Dubois, religious affairs director for the Barack Obama campaign. With a staff of 4 employees and 6 interns, he has organized some 200 town hall meetings and is beginning a series of smaller house parties to discuss the campaign and values issues. Dubois is also responsible for a faith portion of Obama's website and provides resources for many faith-oriented groups organized to support Obama.

Minority Religions Face Burial Problems In Kyrgyzstan

Forum 18 reports today on the problems faced in Kyrgyzstan by members of non-Muslim faiths in burying their dead. A fatwa issued by the country's Muftiate bars non-Muslims from being buried in Muslim cemeteries. Cemeteries are run by local governments and particularly in rural areas, often Muslim cemeteries are the only ones available. Sometimes local imams allow burials of non-Muslims, but only if Muslim funeral rites are performed. A meeting of Russian Orthodox, Protestant and Muslim leaders earlier this month at the State Agency for Religious Affairs decided that each time such a problem occurred, the heads of religious communities should meet to find a common solution.

Poll Contrasts Views On Sharia In Iran, Egypt, Turkey

Today the Muslim-West Facts Initiative (a collaboration of the Gallup polling organization and the Coexist Foundation) published the first in a series of articles on views toward Islamic Sharia law in Iran, Egypt, and Turkey. The article is based on extensive polling data from last year. The authors summarize the results of the poll as follows:

In Iran, a majority of residents tell Gallup that Sharia must be a source of legislation, but not the only source. In Turkey, poll findings show how divided the Turkish public is about the role of Sharia in legislation. In Egypt, however, public opinion is much more likely to favor religious law as the only source of legislation....

[M]en and women express strikingly similar views within each country on the role of Sharia in legislation.... Overall, older respondents are more likely than younger ones to say Sharia must be the only source of legislation (although this pattern is weaker in Turkey than in Iran and Egypt).... In Turkey and Iran, those who have a secondary level of education are less likely than those with a primary level of education or less to say Sharia must be the only source of legislation. There is no difference by education level in Egypt.

3rd Circuit Finds Prison Music Policy Does Not Violate Establishment Clause

In Young v. Beard, (3rd Cir., July 8, 2008), the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a prisoner's free expression and Establishment Clause challenges to the Pennsylvania prison system's policy on recreational music for prisoners. After criticism of the state's prior policy that allowed independent inmate bands, the Department of Corrections changed its policy to allow only individual music playing in cells or institutional musical groups that can play at an annual talent show or special events. However inmate bands are still permitted for religious services. This was challenged by an inmate who had been a member of a secular inmate band prior to the policy change. The court held that the prior program posed legitimate security concerns, and several viable alternatives still exist for inmates to perform music. Turning to the Establishment Clause challenge, the court found that changes to the secular music program did not have the purpose or effect of advancing religion. Permitting religious bands accommodates free exercise and does not cross the line into endorsement of religion. (See prior related posting.)

Michigan Church Wins Zoning Challenge In Settlement

Alliance Defense Fund yesterday announced a settlement in Celebration Community Church v. City of Muskegon, (WD MI, filed March 2008) (full text of complaint). Celebration Church challenged the city's denial to it of a special use permit so it could use a former automobile dealership it purchased as a church. The city cited loss of property tax revenue, adverse impact on bars located nearby, and incompatibility with the surrounding area as reasons. However the Liquor Control Commission said that the church would not impact the license of an existing nearby bar. The city did not require special use permits for non-religious assembly uses in areas zoned general business. The suit alleged that the denial infringed its free speech, free exercise, equal protection and due process rights under the U.S. and Michigan constitutions and its rights under RLUIPA. The court directed the parties into mediation, and they reached a settlement under which the church would be permitted to use the property for religious purposes. Muskegon City Council approved the settlement on June 24.

India, Under Christian Pressure, Blocks Migration of Bene Menashe To Israel

IANS reports today that the Indian government has refused to grant permission for nearly 200 Bnei Menashe members to emigrate from the country's northeaster state of Mizoram to Israel. After the Bene Menashe were recognized by the Israeli rabbinate as descendants of ancient Israelites, a group of rabbis came to India and converted the Mizo Jews-- who had been born as Christians. While Israel had planned to welcome the group under its Law of Return, a group of Christians in India apparently filed a formal protest with the Indian external affairs ministry and home ministry. They wanted the planned migration blocked and the conversions of the Bene Menashe stopped. Since 1994, some 1000 Bene Menashe members have migrated to Israel from Mizoram and its neighboring state of Manipur.

Defense Department Moves To Dismiss Suit Claiming Religious Discrimination

God and Country blog reports that yesterday the Defense Department filed a motion to dismiss and a memorandum in support of the motion (full text) in Hall v. Welborn. In March, Jeremy Hall and the Military Religious Freedom Foundation filed suit in federal district court in Kansas claiming that a meeting of atheists and freethinkers organized by Hall in Iraq was interrupted by an Army major, and that Hall was not recommended for promotion because his platoon sergeant thought he would be "unable to put aside his personal convictions and pray with his troops" and would have trouble bonding with them. (See prior posting.) In support of its motion to dismiss, the Defense Department argued that the court need not reach the merits. It contends that because Hall did not show that the major's action was likely to recur, he lacked standing to obtain an injunction. It claimed that Hall failed to use existing internal procedures to complain about his treatment and that he did not show injury from the alleged pattern and practice in support of religion. It also argued that judicial review would interfere with military operations and personnel matters committed to military expertise.

Lawsuit Challenges Publishers' Translation of Bible Verse

An unusual pair of federal lawsuits filed pro se by a Michigan man complain about the translation of a passage in I Corinthians in versions of the Bible from two publishers. The verse, I Corinthians 6:9, describes those who will not inherit the kingdom of God. Early versions of Bibles published by Thomas Nelson Publishing and Zondervan Publishing House include "homosexuals" in the list. Later translations instead use the term "sodomites". The exact theory of plaintiff Bradley Fowler's case is not clear. In his handwritten complaints against Thomas Nelson Publishing (full text of complaint) and Zondervan (full text of complaint) he variously charges that inclusion of the term homosexual caused him, as a homosexual, emotional harm. However he also complains that the publishers eliminated the term in later editions without informing the public. Reporting on the lawsuits, today's Grand Rapids Press says the court refused Fowler's request for an appointed attorney. The judge questioned the nature and efficacy of the claims. The suits seek $60 million in damages from Zondervan and $10 million from Thomas Nelson.

UPDATE: Bill Poser on Language Log has an excellent discussion of the translation issues posed by the original Greek in the Biblical verse at issue.

Gaer Elected New Chair of USCIRF

Last week, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom announced the election of Felice D. Gaer as chair for the coming year beginning July 1. She succeeds Michael Cromartie who will serve as vice-chair along with Dr. Elizabeth H. Prodromou. Gaer is Director of the Jacob Blaustein Institute for the Advancement of Human Rights of the American Jewish Committee.

Muslim Woman Sues For Employment Discrimination

Yesterday a Sacramento, California Muslim woman filed suit in state court charging National Credit Acceptance, Inc. with employment discrimination. The complaint in Southavilay v. National Credit Acceptance, Inc., (CA Super. Ct., filed July 8, 2008), alleges that Zaylanin Southavilay was told she could not continue working as a telephone debt collector with National Credit Acceptance if she continued to wear a hijab (Islamic headscarf). Southavilay sued under California law (California Government Code, Sec. 12940) claiming religious discrimination and failure to accommodate her religious belief. She also charged wrongful termination in violation of public policy. The Asian Law Caucus issued a release reporting on the filing of the lawsuit.