High School Sued Over Refusal To Recognize Student Bible Club

Yesterday a high school student in Lindenhurst, New York, filed a federal lawsuit against his high school challenging its refusal to give official recognition to a student Bible Club. The school claimed that recognition would violate the Establishment Clause. The complaint (full text) in A.Q. v. Board of Education of Lindenhurst Union Free School District, (ED NY, filed 2/5/2009), alleges that the school's insistence on treating the Bible Club as an outside community group violates the federal Equal Access Act, as well as students' speech, religion, equal protection and due process rights. Alliance Defense Fund yesterday issued a release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

Property Adjudication In Lubavitch Feud is Upheld, But Injunction Reversed

Earlier this week, a New York appellate court handed down another decision in the long running legal battle between two factions of the Chabad Lubavitch movement. (See prior related posting.) In Merkos L'Inyonei Chinuch, Inc. v Sharf, (NY App. Div., Feb. 3, 2009), the appellate court upheld the trial court's decision that Congregation Lubavitch, Inc. (the Messianist faction of Chabad) had no ownership interest in two adjoining properties making up the headquarters and central synagogue of the Lubavitch movement. The court held that

the existence of a divisive doctrinal dispute within the Lubavitch community does not render this action nonjusticiable, even if the facts underlying the action arise from that dispute and ... the commencement of the action was motivated by that dispute. Property disputes between rival religious factions may be resolved by courts, despite the underlying doctrinal controversy, when it is possible to do so on the basis of neutral principles of law....

However the court did reverse the award of a permanent injunction against CLI, finding that plaintiffs failed to show a threatened or probable violation of their property rights. There was no evidence linking CLI to vandalism against a plaque on the building. [Thanks to Y.Y. Landa for the lead.]

Obama Sets Up Revamped Faith-Based Office; Delays Decisions On Religion-Based Hiring By Grantees

President Barack Obama today issued an Executive Order (full text) setting up the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships as the successor to the Bush administration's Office of Faith Based and Community Initiatives. Several paragraphs were added to the section of the Bush Executive Order expanding the functions of the Office. Among the additions are "ensur[ing] that services paid for with Federal Government funds are provided in a manner consistent with fundamental constitutional commitments guaranteeing the equal protection of the laws and the free exercise of religion and prohibiting laws respecting an establishment of religion."

The Executive Order creates a new President's Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships made up of not more than 25 members. In a separate announcement, the President today named the first 15 members. They are a diverse group, including some individuals from secular social service agencies, as well as religious ones. A number of Protestant clergy, an academic (Melissa Rogers of Wake Forest University), and the president of Catholic Charities USA are among the Council members. As previously announced, the President also appointed Joshua DuBois as Director of the new office. (See prior posting.)

One provision in the Executive Order allows the White House to submit to the Attorney General constitutional and statutory questions on whether existing or prospective grants and practices are consistent with law. This reflects the President's decision not to issue a blanket regulation on whether recipients of faith-based funding can hire on religious grounds. Instead, as reported today by Politico, it will consider the issue on a case-by-case basis. According to US News, this is consistent with a report issued by the Brookings Institution last December (full text) that called for further study of the issue based on better data. (See prior related posting.)

Obama Gives Wide-Ranging Talk At National Prayer Breakfast

This morning, President Barack Obama attended the annual National Prayer Breakfast at the Washington Hilton hotel. (Washington Post.) The vice president, and various members of the Cabinet and of Congress also attended, as did representatives from around the world. The keynote address at the breakfast was delivered by former British Prime Minister Tony Blair. (USA Today.) President Obama gave a fascinating speech (full text), alluding to national and world problems facing his administration. He observed:

it strikes me that this is one of the rare occasions that still brings much of the world together in a moment of peace and goodwill. I raise this history because far too often, we have seen faith wielded as a tool to divide us from one another – as an excuse for prejudice and intolerance.

Previewing the Executive Order that he will sign later today creating the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, he said:

The goal of this office will not be to favor one religious group over another – or even religious groups over secular groups. It will simply be to work on behalf of those organizations that want to work on behalf of our communities, and to do so without blurring the line that our founders wisely drew between church and state.... We will also reach out to leaders and scholars around the world to foster a more productive and peaceful dialogue on faith.

Obama also spoke of his own religious upbringing and journey:

I was not raised in a particularly religious household. I had a father who was born a Muslim but became an atheist, grandparents who were non-practicing Methodists and Baptists, and a mother who was skeptical of organized religion, even as she was the kindest, most spiritual person I’ve ever known....

I didn’t become a Christian until many years later, when I moved to the South Side of Chicago after college. It happened not because of indoctrination or a sudden revelation, but because I spent month after month working with church folks who simply wanted to help neighbors who were down on their luck....

Oath Requirement In Oregon Tax Form Violates Free Exercise Rights

In Aslin v. Coos County Assessor, (OR Tax Ct., Jan. 13, 2009), a county tax assessor in Oregon refused to accept an unsigned personal property tax return from James Aslin. Aslin objected on religious grounds to the oath, included in the tax form, that required him to state "under penalties of false swearing" that the return is accurate. He submitted his return with the declaration crossed out and "I don't swear" written in the signature box. The Oregon Tax Court held that by rejecting Aslin's return without offering him an alternative method to confirm or declare the information in it was true, the assessor's office violated Aslin's free exercise rights under Art. I, Sec. 3 of the Oregon Constitution.

Muslim Charity May Get Access to Seized Documents

The Toledo Blade yesterday reported on an order issued Jan. 30 by an Ohio federal district judge ordering the government to produce copies of all the material seized in the 2006 searches of the headquarters of a Muslim charity and of its president's home. The search followed a freeze of the assets of KindHearts by the Treasury Department while the Office of Foreign Assets Control decides whether the group should be classified as a "Specially Designated Global Terrorist" organization. The freeze is still in effect. (See prior posting.)

The order is a first step toward giving KindHearts access to the documents, hard drives, videotapes and the like that up to now have been available only under severe restrictions. KindHearts' attorneys say that the organization needs access to the documents to defend against the charges that it funded the terrorist organization Hamas. Up to now, a magistrate's order gave KindHearts' lawyers access to a computer disk containing documents, but the attorneys were not permitted to print them out or share them with their clients. Under the court's new order, the government can still withhold specific documents where explicit justification is furnished.

Pope Says Holocaust Denying Bishop Must Recant

The Washington Post yesterday reported that Pope Benedict XVI's lifting of the excommunication of Lefebvrite bishop Richard Williamson (see prior posting) has generated a storm of protest from Benedict's home country, Germany. German Chancellor Angela Merkel said that the Pope's action welcoming Williamson back into the Church gives "the impression that Holocaust denial might be tolerated." Meanwhile, Zenit.org yesterday reported that the Pope did not know of Williamson's views when he acted. The Vatican released the full text of a note from Vatican Secretariat of State clarifying the Vatican's position. It says in part:

The viewpoints of Bishop Williamson on the Shoah are absolutely unacceptable and firmly rejected by the Holy Father, as he himself noted last Jan. 28, when, referring to that savage genocide, he reaffirmed his full and indisputable solidarity with our brother recipients of the First Covenant, and affirmed that the memory of that terrible genocide should induce "humanity to reflect on the unpredictable power of evil when it conquers the human heart," adding that the Shoah remains "for everyone a warning against forgetting, against negating or reductionism, because violence committed against even one human being is violence against all."

Bishop Williamson, to be admitted to episcopal functions in the Church, must also distance himself in an absolutely unmistakable and public way from his position on the Shoah, which was unknown to the Holy Father in the moment of the lifting of the excommunication.

OSCE Find Problems With Kazakhstan's Religion Law

On January 31, the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights released a lengthy opinion (full text) on the proposed amendments to Kazakhstan's Religion Law. The amendments, passed by Kazakhstan's parliament last month, have been sent by the country's president to the country's Constitutional Council for review. (See prior posting.) The OSCE memo says that while Parliament met some of the concerns about the law, the law still does not meet Kazakhstan's OSCE commitments. The memo identifies eleven remaining areas of concern, ranging from problems in the provisions on registration of religions to overly-rigid parental consent provisions. Forum 18 yesterday posted a long report on the OSCE opinion.

Court Affirms IRS Has Misdelegated Church Summons Authority

In United States v. Living Word Christian Center, (D MN, Jan. 30, 2009), a Minnesota federal district judge adopted earlier recommendations made by a federal magistrate judge refusing to enforce an IRS summons for various church records. (See prior posting.) The court agreed that "an 'appropriate high-level Treasury official' has not made the necessary 'reasonable belief' determination required by Congress [in IRC Sec. 7611] before a church tax inquiry and examination of a church's records can occur." The IRS had delegated the determination to the Director of Exempt Organization Examinations. The government unsuccessfully argued that the court should defer to the IRS interpretation of the statutory requirement. At issue was an IRS summons seeking information about loans, lease of an aircraft and compensation paid by a Brooklyn Park (MN) megachurch to its pastor, Mac Hammond. Yesterday's Chronicle of Philanthropy reported on the decision.

Missouri Baptist Convention Loses Attempt To Regain Conference Center

In Executive Board of the Missouri Baptist Convention v. Windermere Baptist Conference Center, (MO App., Feb. 3, 2009), a Missouri appellate court rejected attempts by the Missouri Baptist Convention to regain control of the valuable Windermere Baptist Conference Center that broke away from the Convention (along with 4 other institutions) in a dispute over the fundamentalist stance of new MBC leaders. The court held that 2001 amendments to Windermere's articles of incorporation taking away MBC's power to elect Windermere trustees were validly adopted. MBC was not a member of Windermere and so, under the Missouri's non-profit corporation law, it was not entitled to vote on the amendments. The court also rejected MBC's contention that Windermere's charter should be rescinded and its property returned to MBC, as well as various other claims by MBC. ABP yesterday reported on the decision. (See prior related posting.)

Canadian Court's Order Against Falun Gong Focuses On Expressive Conduct

In Vancouver (City) v. Zhang, (B.C. Sup. Ct., Jan. 29, 2009), the Supreme Court of the Canadian province of British Columbia granted the city of Vancouver an injunction requiring Falun Gong protesters to remove a hut and billboard that they had constructed on a residential street in front of the Chinese Consulate. The protesters' vigil has been going on since 2001. The court held that the city could apply a ban on structures encroaching or obstructing free use of a street to the expressive conduct involved in the Falun Gong's protest. Its application does not violate the expression protections in Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The court said: "The protest vigil has expressive content. However, the method of the respondents' expression ... is incompatible with the fundamental purpose of the street and is therefore excluded from the protection of s. 2(b) of the Charter." The court emphasized that the city has not banned other forms of protest, such as carrying signs and posters or engaging in peaceful meditation. CBC News last week reported on the decision.

Court Issues Preliminary Injunction In Indiana Released Time Program

In H.S. v. Huntington County Community School Corporation, (ND IN, Feb. 3, 2009), an Indiana federal magistrate judge recommended that a preliminary injunction be granted in a challenge to a released time program at a Huntington, Indiana elementary school. Third and fourth graders are released for 30 minutes per week to participate in the "By the Book" program offered by local churches in mobile classroom trailers located on school property. The court concluded that a child who parent has elected not to have him participate in the program (and his parent) has standing to challenge the program. It went on to hold that religious instruction to elementary students on public school property during the school day in a church-owned mobile classroom likely violates the Establishment Clause. WANE-TV News yesterday reported on the decision. (See prior related posting.)

5th Circuit Hears Arguments In Texas Moment of Silence Case

Yesterday, the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in Croft v. Governor of Texas (recording of full arguments). The appeal grows out of a decision last year by a Texas federal district court rejecting an Establishment Clause challenge to the Texas law that requires public schools to observe a moment of silence each day during which students may "reflect, pray, meditate, or engage in any other silent activity...." According to yesterday's Dallas Morning News, oral arguments focused on why the legislature specifically referred to prayer in the statute.

Rabbinic Judges In Israel Sue To Challenge New Judicial Appointments

The Jerusalem Post reported last week on a lawsuit filed in Israel's High Court by a group of long-time Conversion Court judges. The lawsuit challenges the January 1 Cabinet approval of ten new rabbinic judges for the Conversion Court. Petitioners claim that one of the members of the special committee that selected the new judges, Civil Service Commissioner Shmuel Hollander, was misled into thinking that there was a shortage of judges on the court. In fact there is not enough work to go around. Conversion court judges are paid per court session and by the number of individuals they convert. (Background from Haaretz.) Petitioners also allege nepotism and other irregularities in the new appointments. [Thanks to Religion & State In Israel for the lead.]

Title VII Suit Against DC Transit Authority Settled

The Justice Department announced yesterday that it has entered a settlement agreement with the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority in a Title VII religious discrimination case. The lawsuit was filed after WMATA refused a religious accommodation to permit Gloria Jones, who had preliminarily been hired as a bus driver, to wear a long skirt instead of pants. The settlement calls for WMATA to implement a religious accommodation policy and provide mandatory training on religious discrimination and accommodation for its supervisory employees. WMATA will also pay Jones $47,324 and will pay $2,500 each to two other individuals who were refused an accommodation to depart from the Authority's uniform policy. (See prior related posting.)

Court Details How To Measure Distance From Church For Liquor License

A Rhode Island statute (Sec. 3-7-19) prohibits granting a liquor license to any establishment located within 200 feet of any place of public worship. Block Island (RI) Times reported Monday that a state Superior Court judge has interpreted the statute to require examination of exactly where on a restaurant's property liquor will be served. Instead of looking at the boundary of the Water Street Cafe, the court has ordered state Department of Business Regulation to determine the exact location within the restaurant building of the cafe that will serve liquor, outside areas (such as picnic tables) where liquor may be consumed, and other areas used in connection with the sale and consumption of alcohol. This would include parking lots where liquor patrons park and entrance areas to the cafe. If any of these are within 200 feet of the property line of Harbor Baptist Church, no permit may be issued.

Senate Version of SCHIP Authorizes Grants To Faith-Based Groups

The White House has posted on its website for comment the Senate-approved version of the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009 (SCHIP). It says that this version of the bill is expected to pass the House in the coming week. Section 201 of the bill provides for "grants to eligible entities ... to conduct outreach and enrollment efforts." The section goes on [at Sec. 2113 (f)(1)(F)] to define "eligible entities" as including "a faith-based organization or consortia, to the extent that a grant awarded to such an entity is consistent with the requirements of ... 42 U.S.C. 300x–65 relating to a grant award to nongovernmental entities."

Darwin Day Poster Placed In Key Cities

Darwin Day is Feb. 12. This year it marks the 200th anniversary of the birth of Charles Darwin, and the 150th anniversary of the release of his seminal book on evolution, Origin of Species. Freedom from Religion Foundation announced yesterday that to mark the occasion, it has placed billboards praising Darwin in Dayton, Tennessee and Dover, Pennsylvania. Dayton was the site of the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial. Dover is the town where the school board's insistence on reading a disclaimer in science classes led to a 2005 federal court decision barring the teaching of intelligent design. (See prior posting.) Last month FFRF put up a similar billboard near the University of Wisconsin. (Press release.) FFRF is working to also put up the billboard in Whitehall, Ohio, where the mayor has called America a Christin nation, has left up a nativity scene at city hall and has opposed a Darwin Day resolution in city council. (See prior posting.)

Indian Court Rejects Constitutional Challenge To Appointment of Temple Manager

India's national newspaper, The Hindu, today reports on an interesting religious freedom decision handed down Monday by the Madras High Court . The Lord Nataraja Temple in the town of Chidambaram is an important religious pilgrimage site. The Temple is operated by some 300 families know as Podhu Dikshidars. After alleged mismanagement in accounting for funds and offerings by the Dikshidars, the Tamil Nadu state government in 1982 appointed an Executive Officer to take over management of the Temple and of the offerings made there. The Dikshidars sued claiming that the order violated their religious rights protected by India's Constitution.

In Sri Sabanayagar Temple,Chidambaram v. State of Tamil Nadu, (Madras High Ct., Feb. 2, 2009), the High Court first focused on Article 26 of the Constitution that protects the right of every "religious denomination" to maintain its own religious institutions and manage its own religious affairs. The court ruled that the Dikshidars were not a religious denomination, so any claim they had fell under Section 25 of the Constitution that protects "freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion." The section goes on, however, to provide that this does not prevent the government from "regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice." The court ruled that management of the Temple and Temple offerings are not an integral part of religion or religious practice. Therefore they are not protected by Section 25.

UPDATE: The Feb. 6 Times of India reports that the Podhu Dikshidhars have filed an appeal of the High Court's decision, claiming that the court was wrong in concluding that funds had not been properly accounted for. The appeal also argues that any mismanagement charges should be adjudicated only by the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment commissioner, and that Temple administration should not be vested in someone not belonging to the Dikshidhars.

Church Loses RLUIPA Challenge To Denial of Use Permit

In Centro Familiar Cristiano Buenas Nuevas v. City of Yuma, (D AZ, Jan. 30, 2009), an Arizona federal district court rejected claims by a church that Yuma, Arizona's denial to it of a conditional use permit violated its rights under RLUIPA, the 1st and 14th Amendments, and the Arizona Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The church acquired property in Yuma's Old Town District and then sought permission to use it for religious practices. The city's Planning and Zoning Commission denied a permit, finding that this use was inconsistent with city plans to turn the area into a tourism, entertainment and retail corridor. The court concluded that this did not impose a substantial burden on the church's religious practice in violation of RLUIPA. Other properties that would meet the church's needs are available in Yuma. The court also held that the denial did not violate RLUIPA's equal terms provision even though some secular membership organizations were permitted to locate in the area without a special use permit. The distinctions were based on compatibility with the planned use of the area. Yesterday's Yuma Sun reported on the decision. (See prior related posting.)