Bulgaria Targets Unregistred Religious Groups

Bulgaria's Law on Religions requires that religious organizations be registered in order to operate in the country. The Sofia News Agency reports today that the Supreme Administrative Prosecutor's Office has asked a court to terminate the activities of five unregistered organizations that are engaging in religious activities under the guise of humanitarian or educational goals.

US Agency Calls For President To Press China On Religious Freedom

Yesterday the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom held a joint press conference with the Congressional Human Rights Caucus at which it called for President Bush to speak out publicly on human rights during his trip to the Beijing Olympics. (Press release). Pointing particularly to repressive measures taken by the Chinese government against Tibetan Buddhist monks and nuns as well as against Protestant and Catholic groups in China, USCIRF suggested seven specific high profile steps that President Bush could take while in China.

Meanwhile, the International Campaign for Tibet published an English translation of an official government document that outlines new measures to be taken against Buddhist monasteries and monks in Tibet in the wake of protests against Chinese rule. The document, issued by the Kardze Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture in Sichuan province, calls for measures that are characterized by Tibetans as reminiscent of China's Cultural Revolution. (See prior related posting.)

New Lawsuit Challenges New York's Enforcement of Kosher Inspection Laws

Four months after filing a similar lawsuit (see prior posting), Long Island (NY) kosher butcher Brian Yarmeisch has filed a new federal lawsuit challenging the manner in which New York state enforces its kosher food laws. Yesterday's New York Jewish Week reports that Yarmeisch seeks a preliminary injunction to prevent the state from continuing to enforce portions of its Agriculture and Markets Law. This comes as the state has not yet responded to the March lawsuit. Yarmeisch believes that New York's Kosher Law Protection Act of 2004 merely requires that he post the name of the person who supervises the kosher status of products he sells. However state inspectors have continued to visit his premises to look at whether the prepared food items he sells contain only ingredients that were certified as kosher. At issue are differences between Orthodox and Conservative rabbis over whether items such as vegetables, dairy products and certain wines must actually carry a kosher certification in order to be used.

Turkey's Ruling Party Avoids Dissolution For Anti-Secular Activities In Close Court Decision

Media around the world, including the New York Times and London's Guardian, are reporting on Wednesday's decision by Turkey's Constitutional Court that stopped short of ordering dissolution of the ruling AK (Justice and Development) Party that had been charged with "becoming a focal point of anti-secular activity." (See prior posting.) Instead the court voted to cut the public funding of the AK Party in half, and to issue a "serious warning" to it about its moves-- particularly attempts to permit women to wear the hijab on university campuses-- which are seen as undermining the secular principles on which the country was founded. Tuesday's Wall Street Journal carried a backgrounder on the secular roots created by the country's founder, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. The AKP's loss of state funding is expected to be made up by private contributions from supporters.

Today's Zaman gives more detailed information on Wednesday's court decision, and a backgrounder on the closure of political parties in Turkey. At the center of the decision are provisions in Articles 68 and 69 of Turkey's Constitution:

68(4)... The ... activities of political parties shall not be in conflict with the independence of the state, its indivisible integrity..., human rights, the principles of equality and rule of law, sovereignty of the nation, the principles of the democratic and secular republic...

69(7) The decision to dissolve a political party permanently owing to activities violating the provisions of the fourth paragraph of Article 68 may be rendered only when the Constitutional Court determines that the party in question has become a centre for the execution of such activities....

(8) Instead of dissolving them permanently in accordance with the above-mentioned paragraphs, the Constitutional Court may rule the concerned party to be deprived of State aid wholly or in part with respect to intensity of the actions brought before the court.

In Wednesday's decision, 6 of the court's 11 judges voted to dissolve the party, one vote short of the 7 needed for dissolution. Four other judges voted to cut the AKP's state funding. Only Chief Justice Haşim Kılıç voted against imposing any sanctions. In announcing the Court's decision, the Chief Justice urged politicians to amend Turkish law to make it more difficult to bring cases seeking closure of political parties in order to avoid the kind of political crisis that this case has generated.

Chabad Wins On Challenge To Florida City's Zoning Rules

In Chabad of Nova, Inc. v. City of Cooper City, (SD FL, July 29, 2008), a Florida federal district court ruled in favor of an Orthodox Jewish Chabad group on most of its challenges to a Cooper City (FL)'s zoning restrictions imposed on houses of worship. The group was prevented from opening an Outreach Center in an area zoned for business. The court agreed with Chabad that portions of the city's regulations, both before and after they were amended in 2006, violate the Exclusion Provision of RLUIPA (Sec. 2(b)(3)(b)) which bans land use regulations that unreasonably limit religious assemblies in a local community. It also held that the city's prohibition of religious assemblies in Business Districts violates the Equal Protection Clause. Fianlly, the court refused to dismiss Chabad's First Amendment claims. Today's South Florida Sun-Sentinel reporting on the decision says that a trial is scheduled Monday on the issue of damages.

Korean Buddhists Complain About Treatment From Christian President

Today's Korea Times reports that Buddhists in South Korea are complaining that Korea's president, Lee Myung-bak, is responsible for disrespectful treatment of Buddhists. Lee, who took office in February 2008, is a Christian. In June, the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs apologized after it was discovered that a travel information service his ministry provided did not include the location of Buddhist temples. The latest incident came yesterday as police insisted on searching the car of a Buddhist leader at the gate of Jogye Temple in Seoul. The Temple has been under police surveillance since organizers of a protest against US beef sought refuge there to avoid arrest.

Court Rejects Free Exercise Exemption From Law Numbered "666"

A Tennessee appellate court last week rejected a rather unusual free exercise challenge to the state's child support requirements. In Sherrod v. Tennessee Department of Human Services, (TN Ct. App., July 25, 2008), Michael Sherrod, a divorced father, refused to pay child support through the state's Central Child Support Receipting Unit. He argued that he would pay directly to his former wife, or to the court, but that because the central state agency was set up under a federal statute codified at 42 USC Sec. 666, payment through that entity would involve him in transmitting funds to a "Satanic entity" in violation of his religious beliefs. In support of his argument, Sherrod, a Born Again Christian and a Sunday School teacher, cited the Book of Revelation (13:18) where the number 666 is associated with the Mark of the Beast and the end of days. (Background.) The court, however, held that the state's statute is uniformly applicable and facially neutral as to religion. Therefore it is valid so long as it reasonably promotes a legitimate public purpose. The court found that standard to be satisfied.

Establishment Clause Challenge To Mt. Soledad Cross In Federal Hands Is Rejected

Yesterday, yet another decision was handed down in the long-running dispute over the Mt. Soledad Veterans Memorial in San Diego, California, and the large Cross that is part of the memorial. Trunk v. City of San Diego, (SD CA, July 29, 2008), was a challenge by Jewish War Veterans of America and four individuals who claimed that Congress violated the Establishment Clause when it acquired the Mt. Soledad memorial from the city of San Diego and preserved the memorial with the cross on it after it was acquired. In the case, a California federal district court judge rejected both of these arguments. The court found that Congress' primary purpose in acquiring the memorial was to preserve the site as a veterans' memorial, not to advance or favor a particular religion. It held further that maintaining the site with its cross has primarily a patriotic and nationalistic effect, rather than a religious one. The court rejected plaintiffs' contention that any display containing a Latin cross is inherently religious. Yesterday's San Diego Union-Tribune reported on the decision.

British City Charged With Religious Discrimination Over Internet Filters

In Britain, the National Secular Society is challenging the new Internet usage policy adopted by Birmingham City Council. BBC News reports that the city's new Bluecoat filtering software blocks city employees from viewing websites with content related to witchcraft, Satanism, occult practices, atheistic views, voodoo rituals or mysticism. National Secular Society president Terry Sanderson says the policy violates the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003 because it discriminates against atheists and followers of Wicca. Websites dealing with other religious beliefs are accessible to employees. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

UPDATE: According to an Augl 15 release by the national Secular Society, the city of Birmingham says it does not intend to filter out websites dealing with atheism, and a new version of the filtering software it is using apparently allows them to exclude blockage of such sites.

Catholic Anti-War Demonstrators May Not Assert "Necessity" Defense

In United States v. McSweeney, (D MA, July 24, 2008), a federal magistrate judge denied a motion by a group of anti-Iraq War demonstrators that they be permitted to raise a defense of "necessity" in their trial. Defendants, members of the Catholic Worker Movement, entered a Worcester (MA) federal courthouse and, without a permit, dropped to their knees and began to pray for an end to Iraq war. After they finished they were arrested on charges of obstructing entrances, obstructing official business and failing to comply with directions of US Marshals. The court ruled that the criteria necessary to assert a defense of "necessity" are not present in this kind of civil disobedience case. Today's Worcester (MA) Telegram reports on the decision.

Spanish Gay Pride Marchers Charged With Insulting Catholics

Article 525.1 of the Spanish Penal Code prohibits publicly making fun of beliefs or ceremonies of members of any religious confession, or humiliating those who practice any religion. Pink News today reports that in Spain, a pro-family group, HazteOir, has invoked this provision in charges filed against organizers of this year's Madrid Gay Pride celebration. Marchers at the event carried a banner picturing Pope Benedict XVI on fire and calling him "chief of the inquisitors."

Kazakstan Expels Unregistered Foreign Missionaries

Interfax reports today that Kazakhstan's Justice Minister Zagipa Baliyeva told a cabinet meeting today that a large number of foreign missionaries from the United States, Georgia, South Korea and Japan have been expelled from the country. The expulsions followed court findings that the foreigners were working as missionaries without the required registration. Baliyeva particularly mentioned the head of Narconon, an organization connected to the Church of Scientology, who was banned for five years from re-entering the country.

Court Rejects Amish Free Exercise Defense In Building Permit Cases

In Morristown, New York, a Town Court judge has refused to dismiss charges against eight Amish men who built or moved homes without the required permits. Today's Watertown Daily Times reports that the defendants, members of the Swartzentruber Amish sect, argued that requirements for smoke alarms and for engineers to approve building designs violate their religious beliefs that oppose modernization. The court, however, rejected their free exercise claims, writing that "the Amish desire 'not to conform to this world' must be reasonably and rationally tempered with required compliance to regulations imposed by a town and society in which they are citizens." The court also rejected motions to dismiss "in the interest of justice" and arguments that defendants had been denied a speedy trial. (See prior related posting.)

British Court Says Sikh Girl Can Wear Kara To School

In Britain, a High Court judge ruled today that a Sikh teenager should be permitted to wear her "Kara" , a plain steel bracelet that is a symbol of her faith, despite school rules against wearing most jewelry. According to Reuters, the court concluded that the ban on religious and racial discrimination required Aberdare Girls' High School in south Wales to exempt 14-year old Sarika Singh from the school's ban on jewelry (other than wrist watches and ear studs). The school argued that the bracelet could be seen as a "symbol of affluence". (See prior related posting.)

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Fowler v. Crawford, (8th Cir., July 25, 2008), the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a decision by Missouri state prison officials to deny a Native American prisoner's request for a sweat lodge to practice his religious faith. Inmate Clifford Fowler alleged that the denial violated his rights under RLUIPA. The court concluded, however, that the prison had a compelling interest in maintaining order and security, and that other alternative were offered to Fowler. Just because another prison in the state's system operates a sweat lodge without incident does not demonstrate that prohibiting a sweat lodge was the least restrictive means to further the institution's security concerns. (See prior related posting.)

In Hathcock v. Cohen, (11th Cir., July 23, 2008), involved claims by a Muslim prisoner that he was prevented from wearing a Kufi, attending Friday prayer services and eating kosher meals on some days during Ramadan. The U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals held that RLUIPA does not create a private action for damages against prison officials in their individual capacities. The court then rejected plaintiff's First Amendment claims, holding that the requirement to obtain approval for religious attire was reasonable as was the reliance on volunteer chaplains to conduct Jumu'ah services. The temporary failure to receive kosher meals was an oversight that was corrected by prison officials.

In Wolff v. Perkins, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55815 (D NH, July 21, 2008), a New Hampshire federal district court dismissed as moot a prisoner's claim that his rights under RLUIPA were violated when his kosher meal privileges were temporarily revoked because he had violated the requirements of a kosher diet. Revised prison policies bar the food service supervisor from suspending an inmate's kosher diet, and instead refer such inmates to the chaplain for counseling. (See prior related posting.)

In Heleva v. Kramer, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55027 (MD PA, July 16, 2008), a Pennsylvania federal district court rejected an inmate's First Amendment and RLUIPA challenges to a prison rule that packages containing books will be delivered to prisoners only if sent directly from the publisher. Confusion about the source of two religious books shipped to plaintiff resulted in an 8-month delay in his obtaining them. (See prior related posting.)

In Stanko v. Patton, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56269 (D NE, July 24, 2008), a Nebraska federal district court rejected First Amendment claims by a litigious white supremacist prisoner who claimed to be an ordained minister of a non-Christian white supremacist religion known as the Church of the Creator. Plaintiff asserted that he was entitled to a holy meal of fresh fruits and nuts to break his religious fast. The court held that there are legitimate cost and security reasons for refusing the special food items. It concluded: "Hate is not a religion and jails do not have to provide nuts and fresh fruits to satisfy the whims of haters." (See prior related posting.)

Establishment Clause Does Not Prevent Court's Deciding Dispute Over Burials

In Attal v. Taylor, (CA Ct. App., July 25, 2008), a California state appellate court held that the Establishment Clause did not preclude it from settling a complicated dispute between three siblings regarding the burial of their mother and brother.

Sharon Attal petitioned a court to have the body of her mother-- Joan Taylor-- removed from a crypt where it had been interred in 1988, and buried in a Jewish cemetery. Joan was born Jewish, but during most of her life was a practicing Presbyterian, and raised her children as Presbyterians. However in 1989, Joan's daughter Sharon began practicing Judaism. When Sharon's brother Mark died, Joan disregarded his instructions that his body be placed next to their mother's, and instead Joan had Mark buried in a Jewish section of a cemetery. Subsequently, Sharon entered an arrangement with her other brother, Dennis, to move their mother Joan's remains to the Jewish cemetery next to Mark, and to transfer the crypt space for use by Dennis and his wife. The fourth sibling, John, however objected, and the cemetery refused to move Joan's body unless a court order was obtained.

When Sharon petitioned the court to have her mother's body moved, John petitioned the court instead to have Mark's body moved from the Jewish cemetery back to the crypt next to their mother, as Mark had originally requested. The trial court denied Sharon's petition and granted John's. The Court of Appeals affirmed, concluding that it could apply neutral principles to resolve the dispute, without becoming entangled in questions of religious doctrine. While the trial court elicited evidence on whether or not Joan and Mark had been practicing Jews, this was relevant to the neutral inquiry regarding their wishes as to the disposition of their remains.

India Supreme Court Considering Constitutionality of Haj Subsidy

On Monday, India's Supreme Court set for hearing a lawsuit by former BJP member of parliament Praful Goradia challenging the constitutionality of the government subsidy given to Muslims going on Haj. IANS reported that a government affidavit supporting the subsidy argues that the Haj has secular foreign policy and foreign relations elements. It said that friendship with foreign countries, including Arab countries, is an aspect of the country's foreign policy. Indian Muslims on Haj "promote international goodwill and understanding". Goradia, on the other hand, claimed that a subsidy for Muslims, without similar subsidies for Hindus, Christians, Buddhists and Sikhs, is discriminatory. (See prior related posting.)

Lithuania Grants Recognized Status To Seventh-Day Adventists

The Adventist News Network reported yesterday that Lithuania has granted the Seventh-Day Adventist Church's application for state recognized status under its Law on Religious Communities and Associations. The determination, made on July 15, means that the church will be entitled to state subsidies and certain tax exemptions. Also its clergy and theology students will be exempt from military service.

Ukrainian President Wants National Church Separate From Moscow Patriarchate

Ukrainian president Viktor Yushchenko wants to create a Ukrainian Orthodox Church, ending affiliation with the Russian Orthodox patriarchate in Moscow. Saturday's Washington Post reported that at the start of a prayer service marking the 1,020th anniversary of Ukraine's and Russia's conversion to Christianity, Yushchenko said: "I believe that, as if by the gift of God, as a historical truth and justice, a national self-governing church will be established in Ukraine," and asked visiting leader of the Orthodox Church, Bartholomew I of Constantinople, to approve the idea. Bartholomew's response was non-committal, as he became the first head of the Orthodox Church to visit Ukraine in 350 years. Many fear that if Constantinople supports Ukraine's move, this could lead to a major schism with Moscow. Unlike Ukraine, countries such as Georgia and Bulgaria have their own Orthodox Patriarchs.

UPDATE: On Wednesday, Archbishop Ionafan representing the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate strongly criticized President Yushchenko's bid for an independent Ukrainian church. According to Interfax, Ionafan said Yushchenko "abused his authority, violated the constitution and ignored the opinion of hierarchs on the unity of the Russian Orthodox Church."

California Buddhist Temple In Complex Litigation Over Control of Assets

Saturday's Long Beach (CA) Press-Telegram reported on the complicated litigation in a battle between two factions for control of Wat Vipassanaram, a Long Beach Cambodian Buddhist temple. The problems began last January when a dissident group, alleging mistreatment of the wat monks and abuse of authority sought an election to replace the board of the Khmer Buddhist Association that controls the temple. (Press-Telegram, Jan. 25). When the group moved ahead with the election of three new officers, opponents, including the temple's monks, went to court. (Press-Telegram, Feb. 15).

On July 2, a Superior Court judge appointed a receiver to manage the finances of the Khmer Buddhist Association, but the temple leadership refused to turn over assets or records to the receiver. On July 8, Siphann Tith, president of the Khmer Buddhist Association, told the receiver that most of the assets had been donated him to a newly formed organization called "Wat Khmer Vipassaram" and had been put under the supervision of the Church of Revelation, a Gnostic church in Orange. (Press-Telegram, July 15).

On Saturday the Press-Telegram reported that the Church of Revelation filed suit in federal court alleging that the court-appointed receiver, David Pasternak, and ten others attempted to improperly seize the assets that were donated to it by the Buddhist temple. The suit challenges the order of the state Superior Court judge that threatened contempt charges if the temple's assets are not turned over to the receiver. The federal lawsuit argues that the temple's donation of assets to the church is protected under First Amendment's Free Exercise clause. The complaint alleges that by divesting itself of all its assets, the temple's board was following the teachings of its religion's founder, Siddhartha Gautama.