White House Won't Comment On Summum Case

The major church-state case pending before the U.S. Supreme Court this term is Pleasant Grove City, UT v. Summum. It was argued last week. (See prior posting.) Apparently the White House wants to steer clear of the controversy. Here is an exchange from yesterday's White House press briefing (full text) by Press Secretary Dana Perino. The reporter asking the question was WorldNet Daily correspondent, Les Kinsolving:

Q: Does the President believe or reject the contention that the First Amendment grants the 33-year-old Summum organization a right to erect a monument to its Seven Aphorisms in the city of Pleasant Grove, Utah, because there's a Ten Commandments monument?

MS. PERINO: Les, I really don't understand why you ask me these questions at the briefing. It's kind of a waste of your time, and it's a waste of everybody else's time. And it's really a waste of my time.

Q: No. This was page one.

MS. PERINO: I missed it.

Q: It was page one.

WorldNet Daily reported today on the exchange.

Court Says Church Can Continue Use of Building, But Must Comply With Code

In Guatay Christian Fellowship v. County of San Diego, (SD CA, Nov. 18, 2008), a California federal district court, citing "the overwhelming public interest ... in religious freedoms and activities", issued a preliminary injunction allowing a church to continue to meet in a trailer park recreation center that it rented. The building is currently zoned for serving alcoholic beverages and live entertainment, but not for religious use, and the county had issued a cease and desist order against the church. While enjoining enforcement of that order, the court required the church to first remedy the eight most serious code violations identified by county zoning authorities and to apply for a master use permit within 30 days of remedying the violations. Other code violations must be remedied within 90 days. The court said that the church's RLUIPA claim was not ripe because the church had not applied for a use permit or a zoning change. Today's San Diego Union-Tribune reports on the decision.

California Supreme Court Will Hear Challenges To Proposition 8

The California Supreme Court yesterday agreed to accept original jurisdiction over challenges to voter approval of Proposition 8, the ballot measure that bans same-sex marriage. (Judicial Council press release.) Yesterday's Los Angeles Times reports on the court's action. The cryptic two-page order issued by the Supreme Court (full text) actually covers a good deal of ground. It agrees to hear three of the six cases filed challenging the validity of Proposition 8. It permits the official proponents of the ballot issue to intervene as a party. In the order, the Court agreed (over one dissent) to decide whether Proposition 8 is a "revision" rather than an "amendment" to California's Constitution. The Proposition was passed under procedures for amendments. The Court will also decide whether Proposition 8 violates the separation of powers doctrine under California's constitution. In addition, if the court decides that Proposition 8 is valid, it will determine its effect on pre-existing gay marriages performed in California.

Finally, the court (over one dissent) refused to stay the operation of Proposition 8 pending the court's decision in the matter. A release by ProtectMarriage.com called denial of the requested stay the most significant part of the order. It is unclear what the court will do as to three other challenges that have been filed, including one by a number of religious groups. (See prior posting.)

Meanwhile, other countries are facing legal issues involving gay marriage. Jurist reported yesterday that the Supreme Court of Nepal has ordered an end to government discrimination based on sexual orientation. It has told the government to draft legislation permitting same-sex partnership and marriage. This follows a decision last year by the Court holding that sexual minorities should be granted equal rights.

UPDATE: The Los Angeles Times reported Wednesday that Proposition 8 supporters are considering the possiblility of a recall campaign aimed at California Supreme Court justices who vote to invalidate the approval of Proposition 8.

UPDATE: All orders, pleadings and briefs in the Proposition 8 challenges are posted on a special page on the Supreme Court's website.

Chabad Messianists Again Lose Court Battle Over Crown Heights Building

Earlier this month, a Brooklyn, New York trial court issued another decision in the long-running battle between two factions of the Chabad Lubavitch movement-- those who believe that the late grand Rebbe, Menachem Mendel Schneerson, who died in 1994, may be referred to publicly as the Messiah, and those who reject the messianist faction. A December 2007 trial court decision gave control of the movement's Crown Heights headquarters to the anti-messianist faction (Agudas Chasedei Chabad and Merkos L'Inyonei Chinuch), allowing them to eject the other faction which maintained a congregation (known as Congregation Lubavitch, Inc.) in the building's basement. (See prior posting.) Apparently this decision has been appealed.

As part of the long running case, in 2006 the court issued an order (full text) barring various individuals in the messianist faction from defacing, removing or interfering with a plaque commemorating the Rebbe's death that had been placed on the outer wall of Chabad's headquarters building. The messianists objected to the plaque because it referred to the Rebbe using a Hebrew acronym for "of blessed memory," thus suggesting that he was dead. (See prior posting and this background.)

Now in Merkos L'Inyonei Chinuch, Inc. v. Sharf, (NY Kings Co. Sup. Ct., Nov. 3, 2008), a New York trial court rejected an attempt by one of the parties to challenge the 2006 decision. In addition the court rejected an attempt by the messianists--Congregation Lubavitch, Inc. (CLI)-- to obtain access to a security plan that Merkos L'Inyonei Chinuch (MLC) agreed to in accepting New York state homeland security funds. CLI also wanted the court to order the concealment of any security cameras and to ban recording of prayer services on the sabbath and holidays except for law enforcement purposes. Also, apparently still asserting their control of the basement synagogue, CLI wanted to ban MLC from access to interior video recordings and wanted other restrictions on access to recordings. The court, relying on the 2007 decision that MLC was the legitimate owner of the property, held that CLI had no basis to obtain these limitations. [Thanks to J.J. Landa for the lead.]

Clergy Led Prayer Is Back In Indiana House

The Indy Star reports that this week, for the first time since January 2006, the Indiana state House of Representatives opened its session with a prayer led by a clergyman. In late 2005, a federal district court enjoined sectarian prayer in the House, but in late 2007 that decision was reversed by the 7th Circuit that held plaintiff lacked standing. (See prior postings, 1, 2.) In 2006, House members had gathered at the back of the Chamber to pray. In 2007 and 2008, the House Speaker read a nonsectarian prayer from the podium. But now clergy-led prayer has returned. Rev. Matthew Barnes opened Tuesday's session with a non-sectarian invocation that asked for God's guidance and blessings, but did not mention Jesus.

UPDATE: Thursday's Fort Wayne Journal Gazette says that the Indiana Senate will open its 2009 sessions with prayers offered by Senate members and by visiting clergy.

Jury Finds For Boulder Colorado Church In RLUIPA Case

The Longmont (CO) Times Call reported yesterday that a federal court jury has rendered its decision in Rocky Mountain Christian Church v. Board of County Commissioners of Boulder County, Colorado. (See prior posting.) The case involves a challenge to the denial of a church's application for a special use permit so it can expand its facilities. The jury rejected the church's equal protection claims, but found that the Boulder County Commissioners violated the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act by not treating the church equally with non-religious institutions and by placing a substantial burden on its exercise of religion. The jury did not award damages that the church sought to cover construction cost increases.

Israeli Officials Express Frustration Over Strict Conversion Rules

In Israel, the strict rules for conversion to Judaism imposed by the Chief Rabbinate continue to rankle government officials who want to find a way to help some 300,000 Russian immigrants who are not technically Jewish under religious law. Many of them wish to convert, but do not want to commit to a strict Orthodox Jewish religious lifestyle which is imposed as a condition of conversion by rabbis who control the government's conversion courts. Yesterday's Jerusalem Post reports that in a speech to the Board of Governors of the Jewish Agency for Israel, outgoing Cabinet Secretary Oved Yehezkel warned of the political problem posed by the situation. He said: "If the haredim [ultra-orthodox] don't begin to show flexibility, the moderate Orthodox establishment in Israel will begin to independently convert many thousands of Jews. In the end, the State of Israel will be forced to recognize these conversions regardless of the desires of the Chief Rabbinate or the official Conversion Authority."

Earlier this week, according to JTA, the Jewish Agency Assembly adopted resolutions calling for Israel to create an independent authority on Jewish conversions and special courts of Jewish law that would apply more "moderate and tolerant" halachic legal standards to facilitate conversions. (Full text of Jewish Agency resolutions.)

Tzipi Livni, the Kadima party candidate for prime minister in the upcoming Israeli elections, took an even more iconoclastic view in a speech to Americans and Canadians in Jerusalem attending the General Assembly of the United Jewish Communities. The Jerusalem Post quotes her remarks: "A Jewish state is not a monopoly of rabbis. It's what each and everyone feels inside. It's not about learning Hebrew or about joining the army, it's about Jewish tradition, Jewish history."

UPDATE: Here is the full text of Foreign Minister Livni's speech from the Ministry of Foreign Affair's website. The relevant quote is slightly different in this version.

Magistrate Says Subpoena for Megachurch Records Was Improperly Issued

Today's Minneapolis Star Tribune reports that a federal magistrate judge in Minneapolis has recommended that the court refuse to enforce an IRS subpoena for financial documents issued to Living Word Christian Center. The church argued that the subpoena for financial records was not approved by "an appropriate high-level Treasury official" as required by Internal Revenue Code Section 7611. IRS sought information about loans, lease of an aircraft and compensation paid by the Brooklyn Park (MN) megachurch to its pastor, Mac Hammond. (See prior posting.) The magistrate judge agreed with the church that authorization by the Director of Exempt Organization Examinations did not meet the Internal Revenue Code's standard. In United States v. Living Word Christian Center, (D MN, Nov. 18, 2008), the magistrate judge suggested that after a 1998 IRS reorganization, the authority to "halt over-zealous examination of churches" should have been given to the Commissioner of Tax Exempt and Government Entities.

AG Choice Eric Holder Has Little Record On Church-State or Religious Freedom Issues

Barack Obama's reported choice for Attorney General, Eric Holder, appears to have little record on church-state or religious freedom issues. The one aspect of his past record that arguably relates to these issues is his support for strong hate crimes enforcement and legislation. His biography on the Lawyers for One America website says that as United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, he "supported a renewed enforcement emphasis on hate crimes so that criminal acts of intolerance would be severely punished." As Deputy Attorney General in the Justice Department in 1999 he presented testimony (full text) strongly supporting the Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 1999. The Act however did not pass Congress. Holder's record gives little hint of whether or not he would continue the Justice Department's "First Freedom Project" launched in 2007 by then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. The project, operated in the Civil Rights Division, emphasizes enforcement in religious discrimination and religious liberty cases.

Objector Arrested For Disrupting Council's Moment of Silence With Loud Prayer

In Southport, Indiana, 70-year old Charles Lynch objects to Mayor Rob Thoman's practice of beginning City Council meetings with a moment of silence instead of a prayer as was the practice before Thoman's election. At Monday night Council's meeting, Lynch began reading a prayer out loud during the moment of silence. When he was asked to stop, he began to pray louder. He also refused to leave the meeting and resisted police trying to take him out, despite the mayor's warning at the beginning of the meeting against such conduct. Lynch was arrested and charged with disorderly conduct. Yesterday's Indy Star reports that Lynch is now threatening to sue for false arrest. He said: "I'm not promoting any church or any religion. All I want is the way it was. Why take away our rights as citizens to have a word of prayer, because we've always had it."

Suit Challenges Refusal To Issue Vanity Plates Refering To God

In Indiana, for an added fee the Bureau of Motor Vehicles issues personalized license plates bearing the driver's selected combination of letters and numbers. Indiana Code Ann. 9-18-15-4 permits the BMV to refuse an application of the requested lettering would be "offensive to good taste and decency." A state regulation interpreting this statute (140 Ind. Adm. Code 2-5-2) prohibits vanity plates that refer to race, religion, deity, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, or political party or affiliation" except for generally accepted references to race or ethnic heritage. Elizabeth Ferris applied for plates reading "BE GODS"-- which she explained was inspired by a Christian musician and meant "belonging to God." On Monday, Ferris filed suit in federal district court (full text of complaint) alleging that the refusal to issue her the requested plates violated the free speech, free exercise, equal protection and due process clauses of the U.S. Constitution. Alliance Defense fund issued a release announcing filing of the lawsuit. It pointed out that Ferris had been issued the plates for 9 years previously before this refusal, and that the state issues its own "In God We Trust" specialty plates. (See prior related posting.) Yesterday's Indy Star also reported on Ferris' lawsuit.

UPDATE: Wednesday's Indy Star reports that the Indiana BMV now says that it will allow Elizabeth Ferris to obtain her "BE GODS" license plate because she attempted to reserve the plates before the Nov. 6 effective date of new regulations that prohibit plates that refer to the deity. However BMV Commissioner Ron Stiver defended the new policy, saying that once it allows mention of God on plates, it will also be forced by prohibitions on viewpoint discrimination to issue offensive plates such as "GODLESS".

Algerian Appeals Court Upholds Conviction For Smoking During Ramadan

In Algeria, an appeals court yesterday upheld the convictions of three men for smoking cigarettes on the street during the Ramadan daylight fasting period this past September. However their sentences for offending religion were reduced from 3 month to 2 months in jail, and they are likely to be released this week. The court reversed the conviction of a fourth defendant who was smoking in private. AP reports that the men-- all of whom were construction workers-- were caught in an upscale Algiers neighborhood. Apparently they were charged under a 2001 law that punishes "denigrating the dogmas or precepts if Islam." Algerian secularists are concerned about growing government enforcement of religious rules.

Maryland County Residents Urge Council To Reject RLUIPA Settlement

In Bristol, Maryland, zoning officials denied Riverdale Baptist Church a permit to construct an expanded campus for its Arundel Bay Christian Academy. The Church in turn filed a RLULIPA lawsuit in federal district court charging discrimination. County attorneys negotiated a settlement under which the county would adopt legislation essentially permitting the project to proceed. Yesterday's Annapolis Capital reported that at Monday's South County Council meeting, some 50 residents urged Council to reject the proposed settlement and fight the lawsuit in court. They point to traffic, water runoff and urbanization concerns.

Newsweek Criticized For Article On Obama As the Antichrist

This week's issue of Newsweek carries an article titled Is Obama the Antichrist? The article reports on various signs pointed to by Christian millennialists leading them to the conclusion that the president-elect is the world leader who will usher in the great battle, the Rapture and the Second Coming. Among the portents is the fact that recently one of the winning lottery numbers in Illinois, Obama's home state, was 666 (the sign of the beast). The article reports that Liberty University's law school dean Mat Staver says he does not believe Obama is the Antichrist, but can see how others might believe it. A posting yesterday on Media Matters takes Newsweek to task for giving credibility in its article to the views of RaptureReady.com editor Todd Strandberg

Holder of Sharia Law Degree Becomes Egypt's First Woman Marriage Registrar

Al Jazeera yesterday published an interview with Amal Soliman, the first woman in Egypt to be appointed as a Mazouna, or female marriage registrar. Registrars conduct wedding ceremonies, recite verses from the Quran at the ceremony and sign the official certificates making the marriage legally binding. They also officiate at divorces. The the Committee of Egyptian Mazouns had challenged Soliman's application, saying that it is inappropriate for a woman to hold the position. However Soliman, who holds a post-graduate degree in Sharia law, eventually won out over ten male applicants for the position. Local family court judge Khaled el-Shalkamy accepted Soliman's application last February, but it took until late September for the Egyptian Minister of Justice to formally sign off on the appointment. Soliman conducted her first wedding ceremony on Oct. 25. On Nov. 14, United Arab Emirates followed suit by appointing its first woman as a Mazouna.

HHS Proposal on Religious Objectors Opposed by Some EEOC Members

Today's New York Times reports on the many comment letters that the Department of Health and Human Services has received on its proposed regulations designed to protect conscience rights of doctors and other health care providers participating in programs receiving HHS funding. The regulations apply to those who have moral or religious objections to providing certain medical procedures, including sterilization and abortion. (See prior posting.) Among the many individuals opposing the rule were three officials of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission: its Republican legal counsel, Reed L. Russell, and two Democratic EEOC members, Stuart J. Ishimaru and Christine M. Griffin. They contend that the new rules are unnecessary in light of existing legal precedent. The Times quotes from the letter submitted by Ishimaru and Griffin which argues that the proposed rules would throw into question from 40 years of court decisions had carefully balanced "employees' rights to religious freedom and employers’ business needs." Here is a link to the public submissions on the rule that have been received by HHS.

Indiana's Sale of "In God We Trust" Plates Without Added Fee Is Upheld

In Studler v. Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles, (IN Ct. App., Nov. 17, 2008), an Indiana state appellate court rejected a challenge to Indiana's sale of "In God We Trust" license plates to motorists without charging the $15 administrative fee that is added to the cost of most other special plates. An Indiana driver who was assessed added fees for the state's "Environment" license plate argued that the differential treatment violated Art. I, Sec. 23 of the state's Constitution. That section provides: "The General Assembly shall not grant to any citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or immunities, which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens." The court rejected plaintiff's argument, holding that "the classification is reasonably related to the inherent characteristics of the license plates," and "the unequal burden is uniformly applicable to all similarly situated class members." Yesterday's Munster (IN) Times reports on the decision.

Religious Groups Ask California Supreme Court To Void Proposition 8

Yesterday the California Council of Churches along with a number of liberal Protestant and Jewish groups filed a "Petition for Writ of Mandate or Prohibition" (full text) with the California Supreme Court seeking to prevent enforcement of Proposition 8 that was approved by voters earlier this month. (Press release). The petition alleges that the state constitutional amendment barring same-sex marriage was adopted using improper procedures. California's constitution (Art. XVIII) has stricter requirements for constitutional "revisions" than it does for "amendments." Only amendments can be adopted through the initiative process-- the route used for Proposition 8. Revisions require a two-thirds vote of the legislature before being submitted to voters. The Petition filed with the Supreme Court reads in part:

The religious institutions that file this petition ... count on article XVIII to ensure that the California Constitution's guarantee of equal protection for religious minorities cannot be taken away without a deliberative process of the utmost care possible in a representative democracy. If Proposition 8 is upheld, however, the assurance will disappear-- for, just as surely as gay men and lesbians could be deprived of equal protection by a simple majority vote, so too could religious minorities be deprived of equal protection-- a terrible irony in a nation founded by people who emigrated to escape religious persecution.

Six separate legal challenges to Proposition 8 have been filed with the California Supreme Court. (San Jose Mercury News, Nov. 17). [Thanks to Don Clark for the lead.]

German Homeschoolers Seek Political Asylum In U.S.

In Germany, children are required to attend public school and home schooling is banned. Uwe and Hannelore Romeike who homeschool their children recently left Germany for the United States in order to avoid fines, jail and possible loss of custody of their children. HSLDA reported yesterday that a petition for political asylum has been filed by the Romeikes who refuse for religious reasons to send their children to Germany's secular public schools. The Romeike family currently lives in Tennessee where they are free to homeschool. Asylum is available where individuals in the U.S. have a well-founded fear of actual persecution because of their race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion if they return to their home country. Homeschool Legal Defense Association is supporting the unusual asylum application.

Town Sued Over Zoning Ban Preventing Church From Sheltering Homeless

According to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, the Pennsylvania ACLU filed a lawsuit in federal court yesterday on behalf of First Apostles Doctrine Church of Brookville, Pennsylvania. The church and its pastor, Rev. Jack L. Wisor, want to use the church as a homeless shelter, saying providing shelter to "guests" is part of its ministry. In August, Wisor was fined $500 for zoning violations stemming from his allowing three homeless men to live in the church's parsonage. (See prior posting.) The lawsuit alleges that the zoning enforcement violates the 1st Amendment's free exercise clause, the 4th Amendment's protection against unreasonable search and seizure, RLUIPA and Pennsylvania's Religious Freedom Protection Act.

UPDATE: The day after the lawsuit was filed, the parties reached a settlement agreement and on Wednesday the court issued an order that permits the church to resume housing up to eight homeless people and two staff members. (York (PA) Daily Record).