Arkansas House Says Guns No Longer Totally Banned In Church

The Arkansas House of Representatives last week passed HB 1237 that would allow holders of concealed carry permits to carry firearms in churches, unless the church posts signs prohibiting them. The bill now goes to the state Senate. The New York Times reported last week that proponents of the bill say it is about the right of churches to make their own decisions -- without governmental intervention-- on whether or not to permit firearms. Opponents, though, say that the notion contradicts long tradition of viewing the church as a "sanctuary" free from the fear of violence. (ABP report.) The bill was introduced after a series of shootings at churches across the country.

80th Anniversary of Vatican City State Marked By Conference

February 11 was the 80th anniversary of the signing of the Lateran Accords that created Vatican City as a separate political state. A conference to commemorate the anniversary was held Feb. 12 to 14, with sessions in Rome and the Vatican. The conference was titled A Small Territory for a Great Mission. Zenit.org reports that Pope Benedict XVI addressed conference participants last Saturday, describing Vatican City State as a "shelter of absolute independence of the Holy See."

College Renovation Funds-- And Religious Exclusion Question-- Back In Stimulus Bill

There has been a good deal of rhetoric and confusion over provisions in the stimulus bill permitting states to use certain funds for higher education renovation projects-- and the concomitant ban on funding for buildings used for religious purposes. (See prior posting.) As pointed out by the Joint Explanatory Statement from the Conference Committee [at pg. H1438], both the House and Senate versions of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act that went into Conference had eliminated an earlier provision that allowed states to make grants for renovation of college buildings used for secular purposes. However the Conference Committee put the provision allowing use of funds for higher education renovations (with the same limits) back in. Searches of the earliest marked up versions-- partly marked up in hand-- did not turn up this addition (which led to an incorrect, but now corrected, posting by me earlier today). Now that an official fully printed version is available, funding for college building renovations reappears [at pg. H1351].

This means that the objections of some religious groups to the bill's limitations on use of this funding is back with us. At issue is this language:

No funds awarded under this title may be used for—... (3) modernization, renovation, or repair of facilities— (A) used for sectarian instruction or religious worship; or (B) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission.

The language poses two separate kinds of concerns. First, some object to the basic policy decision to deny funds for renovations of divinity schools and the like. Second, others do not necessarily disagree with that policy, but fear that the language of the bill is so broad that it may exclude use of funds in situations that were never intended to be excluded. The focus is on the exclusion for facilities "used for sectarian instruction or religious worship."

While that language clearly excludes a school's chapel, what about a regular classroom building that once in a while is used by a student group for prayer? Often student groups can reserve empty classrooms for meetings or events. Suppose a Christian, Jewish or Muslim student group uses a classroom in a science building once a week for an hour for group prayers. Does that preclude use of ARRA funds to remodel the science building? It is certainly unlikely that Congress intended to prevent the building-- where worship was an insubstantial use-- from receiving federal funds, and it is likely that if ever litigated, that is what a court would conclude. The problem however is that careful lawyers must often give legal opinions without court guidance. The fact that a "substantiality" qualification is in one clause of the exclusion and not the other, might give a careful lawyer pause. Last week, a posting on Phi Beta Cons via Blog from the Capital illustrated the scenario that might occur:

A university dusts off an old modernization project for a large and aging classroom building. Prior to submitting its funding proposal to the government, the university counsel's office works to ensure that the building complies with all applicable regulations, and in so doing finds that a Christian student group uses the building for its Friday-night Bible study. This is clearly "use" of the building for "sectarian instruction," so—to be on the safe side, since millions of dollars are at stake—he issues a notice that the group move its activities to another building. The process is repeated as other buildings are made eligible for funding.

UPDATE: Tobin Grant writing in Christianity Today on Wednesday says that the version of the stimulus bill as passed is good for religious institutions. He says: "With the restrictions, religious colleges and universities are able to qualify for the same type of funding as public and secular schools do. Without them, such funding would likely be considered unconstitutional."

Russian Legislator Wants Government Religious TV Channel

In Russia, the Vice Speaker of the Federation Council (the upper house of Russia's parliament) says he supports the idea of creating a Public Council on Morality to deal with objectionable television programming as well as the proposal to create a federal religious television channel. Speaking at the Cathedral of Christ the Savior, Alexander Torshin also expressed concern over protecting children and teens from pornography and immorality on the Internet. Interfax reports that Torshin also encouraged parliamentary consultation with traditional religious organizations in Russia when important laws are being considered.

Stimulus Bill Drafters Recognize Religious Objections To Electronic Health Records [Corrected]

A portion of the stimulus bill, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, that President Obama will sign tomorrow provides funding to computerize health records across the country. Title XIII, known as the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act ("HITECH Act") provides in Sec. 3001 the goal that there be an electronic health record for each person in the United States by the year 2014. (Full text at pg. H1338]). However the Conference Committee's Joint Explanatory Statement on this provision (full text at pg. H1431] creates a "conscience clause" of sorts. It provides:

this ... is not intended to require individuals to receive services from providers that have electronic health records.... This provision does not constitute a legal requirement on any patient to have an electronic health record. For religious or other reasons, non-traditional health care providers may also choose not to use an electronic health record.

Here are links to all portions of the bill and of the Joint Explanatory Statement.

CORRECTION: Meanwhile [contrary to what appeared to be the case from earlier marked up prints of the law], the final version of the law as printed in the Congressional Record retains provisions from earlier versions of the bill on renovation of college buildings. (Full text at pg. H1351). These provisions have created concern among some conservative Christian groups because of exclusions for buildings used for religious purposes. (See prior posting.)

Mild Form of Islamic Law To Control Part of Pakistan's North West Frontier Province

Yesterday's London Guardian reports that in Pakistan, the government will announce today an arrangement under which a mild form of Islamic law will be imposed in the Malakand region of the North West Frontier Province. Taliban insurgents, who control much of the nearby Swat Valley, support a system of speedy Islamic justice and have imposed rigid Wahabi Islamic rule in portions under their control. (See prior posting.) Under the new arrangement for Malakand, religious experts, known as qazi, will sit alongside regular judges to make certain that court rulings comply with Sharia. However provincial government leaders say the main goal of the change is to speed up the slow justice process in the country-- with criminal cases to be completed in 4 months and civil cases in 6 months. Some see this as an attempt to undermine support for Taliban extremists, while others see it as capitulation to them.

UPDATE: The Feb. 18 issue of Indian Express gives more technical details on the court that will be set up in Malakand. A special bench of the Peshawar High Court will be set up, and will be renamed Dar-ul-Quza (Qazi court). A sessions judge —to now be called Qazi — will hear cases with an Alim-e-Din (Quranic scholar) who will decide "religious technicalities." Meanwhile Tuesday's New York Times sets the decision on a new judicial structure in the context of a broader truce that has been agreed to between the government and the Taliban. It says that the arrangement effectively concedes the area as a Taliban sanctuary.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Yossi Nehushtan, Secular and Religious Conscientious Exemptions: Between Tolerance and Equality, (LAW AND RELIGION IN THEORETICAL AND HISTORICAL CONTEXT, Peter Cane, Carolyn Evans, Zoe Robinson, eds., p. 243, 2008).


• Lorenzo Zucca, The Crisis of the Secular State: A Reply to Professor Sajo, (I.CON, 2009).


• Julie Seaman, Hate Speech and Identity Politics: A Situationalist Proposal, (Florida State University Law Review, Vol. 36, pp. 99-123, 2008).

From SmartCILP:

• Yuval Sinai & Benjamin Shmueli, Changing the Current Policy Towards Spousal Abuse: A Proposal for a New Model Inspired by Jewish Law, 32 Hastings International & Comparative Law Review 155-236 (2009).


• Symposium. Pluralism, Religion & the Law: A Conversation at the Intersection of Identity, Faith and Legal Reasoning. Articles by Charles Barbour, Patrick Brown, Quinton H. Dixie, Peter Fitzpatrick, Vincent D. Rougeau, Lisa Shaw Roy, Jack L. Sammons and Susan J. Stabile. 32 Seattle University Law Review 271-405 (2009).

Saudi King Shakes Up Government To Get More Religious Moderates

Today's New York Times and CNN-IBN report that Saudi Arabia's Kiing Abdullah yesterday removed two officials in an effort to reduce the political power of hard-line Muslim clerics. Sheikh Ibrahim al-Ghaith, head of the Muttawah (religious police), has been replaced by Sheikh Abdul Aziz al-Humain. Also Sheik Saleh al-Luhaidan, head of the Supreme Judiciary Court, has been replaced by Saleh bin Humaid. al-Ludhaidan had gained notoriety by issuing a fatwa urging the killing of satellite television executives ecause of the immoral soap operas run by their stations. In two additional moderating steps, King Abdullah for the first time appointed a woman to serve as a deputy cabinet minister. Norah Al-Fayez was appointed deputy education minister for female education . Finally Abdullah expanded the Grand Ulema Commission to include scholars from all branches of Sunni Islam, rather than just Hanbalis who have dominated the Commission in the past.

Afghanistan Appeals Court Upholds Prison For Quran Translators

AP reports that today an appeals court in Afghanistan upheld 20-year prison sentences for two men who published a translation of the Quran in Dari without the original Arabic verses alongside. (See prior posting.) Ahmad Ghaws Zalmai was the translator and Muslim cleric Mushtaq Ahmad signed a letter endorsing the translation. Islamic clerics, who had called for the death sentence, condemned the translation (which was distributed free) as blasphemous and accused defendants of holding themselves out as false prophets. The appeals court, in addition to rejecting the death sentence, reduced the sentences to time already served for the owner of the company that printed the translation and three men charged with helping Zalmai try to flee the country.

Austria's Government Fires Muslim Religion Teacher for Anti-Semitism

Austrian Times reports that last Thursday the country's Education Minister Claudia Schmied ordered Vienna's city school council to dismiss a Muslim man who is currently teaching a course in religion at the city's Cooperative Secondary School. The teacher was charged with distribution anti-Semitic leaflets to his students, urging them to boycott a list of "Jewish firms." Usually teachers of religion in public schools are appointed by their religious denominations, but Schmied said that minister of education has legal authority to intervene when religious teachers violate their legal obligations.

Recent Prisoner Free Excercise Cases

In Weinberger v. Grimes, (6th Cir., Feb. 10, 2009), the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of a civil suit by a former federal prisoner who claimed that his free exercise rights and his rights under RFRA were violated by inadequate accommodation of his Jewish religious dietary needs and by various other actions that favored Christian prisoners and interfered with his religious worship. The court also rejected staste law and privacy claims.

In Shelton v. Chapman, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8728 (SD IL, Feb. 6, 2009), an Illinois federal district court dismissed an inmate's claim that his free exercise rights were violated when one book, the Holy Zumar, was removed from prison chapel library shelves for seven months.

In Cirisan v. Burnett, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8739 (WD MI, Jan. 5, 2009), a Michigan federal magistrate judge recommended dismissal of a challenge under the free exercise clause and RLUIPA by a Jewish inmate who was not permitted to wear a yarmulke with "I.D.F. Israeli Army" written on the side. Prison rules prohibit inmates from wearing military apparel.

In Cano v. Taylor, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9164 (D AZ, Feb. 5, 2009), an Arizona federal district court permitted an inmate to proceed with a claim against the head of the Arizona Department of Corrections alleging improper denial of his grievance alleging free exercise violations.

In Jackson v. Sullivan, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8906 (ED CA, Jan. 29, 2009), a California federal magistrate judge permitted a Rastafarian prisoner to proceed with his claim that RLUIPA was violated when prison officials denied him access to the law library because he refused to comply with haircut regulations.

In Terrell v. Montalbano, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9016 (WD VA, Jan. 23, 2009), a Virginia federal district court dismissed a Muslim prisoner's claim under RLUIPA challenging a 6-month delay in placing him on the Common Fare diet. The court found a compelling governmental interest in using the period to observe plaintiff's religious participation to assess the sincerity of his beliefs.

In Agrawal v. Keim, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9307 (SD IL, Feb. 9, 2009), an Illinois federal district court dismissed claims against prison officials who had misunderstood the religious dietary restrictions of a Hindu prisoner. Plaintiff was permitted by his beliefs to consume dairy products, but he was placed on the vegan diet and then removed from it as a sanction when he consumed food containing dairy.

In McElroy v. Department of Corrections, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9577 (ED CA, Jan. 30, 2009), a California federal magistrate judge permitted an inmate to move ahead with a claim that correctional officers physically attacked him because of his religious beliefs. His allegations of attempted culture theft were found too vague to support a claim.

In Nelson v. Runnels, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9298 (ED CA, Jan. 28, 2009), a federal magistrate judge recommended dismissal of an inmate's free exercise and RLUIPA challenge to the state Department of Corrections hair-length regulations.

In Kay v. Bemis, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10360 (D UT, Feb. 10, 2009), a Utah federal district court, in a long-running case, dismissed plaintiff's free exercise and RLUIPA claims that his right to practice Wicca were improperly infringed in two different detention facilities. (See prior related posting.)

In Finley v. Gonzales, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10765 (ED CA, Feb. 4, 2009), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed a prisoner's claim that his free exercise rights were violated when he was not permitted to attend a religious seminar and receive a certificate or a blessing from God.

San Diego Diocese Will Begin Release of Records On Abusive Priests

In September 2007, the Catholic Diocese of San Diego (CA) entered a settlement in claims of clergy sexual abuse by 144 victims. Part of the settlement included an agreement on release of documents regarding abusive priests and employees, and records of how the Church dealt with them. (See prior posting.) Yesterday's San Diego Union-Tribune reports that the files will finally be released tomorrow on a secure website that will be accessible to plaintiffs' lawyers. Retired Judge William C. Pate will then review challenges to the release of specific documents. Priests who are still living will be permitted to challenge release of information about them. Also the diocese is claiming that certain of the documents should remain private. It is anticipated that it will take 5 to 6 months for the challenges to be decided.

Kentucky Appeals Court Will Review Case On Access To Church Records

Yesterday's Louisville (KY) Courier-Journal reported yesterday that a Kentucky state Court of Appeals earlier this week stayed an order issued by a Jefferson Circuit Court in a suit by church members against the pastor and three lay leaders of the First Baptist Church of Jeffersontown. Twenty-nine members had sued seeking access to the church's financial records. The trial court had ruled that under the church's constitution, members had a contractual right to see the records, and that court enforcement of that right did not involve deciding matters of church doctrine. The Court of Appeals order delays enforcement of the trial court order while the appellate court reviews defendants' free exercise arguments in the case.

This Is "Evolution Weekend" In Houses of Worship

This weekend is Evolution Weekend in churches and synagogues around the country. Sponsored by the Clergy Letter Project, the purpose of the weekend is to demonstrate that "evolutionary theory ... is fully harmonious with religious faith." Over a thousand congregations from all 50 states and 15 foreign countries are slated to take part. Yesterday's International Herald Tribune reports that participating houses of worship plan sermons, Sunday school lessons and even evolution dances.

Geert Wilders Kept Out of Britain, But His Video Is Shown to House of Lords

Controversial Dutch politician Geert Wilders was invited to England last week by a member of Britain's House of Lords, but British immigration officials at Heathrow Airport on Thursday sent him back to the Netherlands, saying that he is a threat to security. The London Telegraph and Radio Netherlands report on developments. Wilders, known for his strong anti-Muslim views, had been invited to show his inflammatory film Fitna in the upper house of Britain's Parliament. The video was screened in the House of Lords Thursday even without Wilders there, but only about 5 members of the House of Lords and 25 other people attended. Het Frije Volk yesterday published the text of the speech Wilders had intended to deliver in the House of Lords. In it, he called Islam a threat, saying that its goals are "world domination, holy war, sharia law, the end of the separation of church and state, the end of democracy." (See prior related posting.)

City Barred From Enforcing Noise Ordinance In Consent Decree

A consent judgment (full text) has been entered by a New York federal district court enjoining the city of Ithaca from enforcing a provision in its municipal ordinances that bans noise which can be heard more than 25 feet away. DeFerio v. City of Ithaca, (ND NY, 2/12/2009) was a lawsuit brought by a Christian evangelist who had been prevented by police from preaching in the Ithaca Commons. The consent order bans enforcement of the limitation against anyone engaged in unamplified speech in a public place. It also orders the police to train its officers in proper enforcement of the ban, and awards attorney's fees and nominal damages. Alliance Defense fund issued a release announcing the consent judgment. An article yesterday in WorldNet Daily has more background on the case. (See prior related posting.)

Some Oklahoma Legislators Object To Invocation By Gay Minister

A routine motion in Oklahoma's House of Representatives encountered unexpected opposition last Wednesday, according to NewsOK. Reverend Scott Jones had been invited by Rep. Al McAffrey to deliver that day's invocation as chaplain for the day in the House. McAffrey is the Oklahoma legislature's only openly gay member. Rev. Jones, in remarks before delivering his prayer, introduced his guests that were in the House gallery, including his "loving partner and fiance, Michael." When at the end of the session, McAffrey moved to include Jones' invocation in the House Journal, 20 representatives voted against the motion. (64 voted in favor.) McAffrey said the unusual negative votes were apparently because Jones and most of his congregation are gay. Americans United issued a release yesterday criticizing the legislators for demonstrating "official favoritism among religions based on their personal religious biases in the public chamber of the Oklahoma House of Representatives."

In Some Nations, Religious and Cultural Objections To Valentine's Day Arise

Tomorrow is Valentine's Day, but in various parts of the world there is religious and cultural resistance to observing the day's customs. The day originated as a celebration of two 3rd century Christian martyrs, both known as St. Valentine. AP reports that in Saudi Arabia, religious police have required stores to remove items that are red, or that are intended as Valentine's Day gifts. Saudi Arabia bans celebrations of Christian holidays. In Sudan, according to ENI, the Sudan Ulema Authority issued a statement saying: "Valentine's Day comes from Western countries. I call on Muslims not to imitate Christians." The London Telegraph reports that in India, a leader of the Hindu nationalist group, Sri Ram Sena, said: "Valentine's Day is definitely not Indian culture. We will not allow celebration of that day in any form." Meanwhile, a group of Indian women who oppose the actions of Sri Ram Sena have begun the Pink Chaddi Campaign. It calls on women to send their pink underwear to Sri Ram Sena leader Pramod Muthalik. The campaign is reported on a blog titled Consortium of Pubgoing, Loose and Forward Women.

UPDATE: India's Sri Rama Sene called off its plans to protest Valentine's Day activities, though its leader Pramod Mutalik has become something of a cultural hero. (India Today, Feb. 13.)

Christian College Student Sues Over Speech Prof's Treatment of His Presentation

On Wednesday, a student at Los Angeles City College filed a federal court lawsuit against a speech professor John Matteson, and against the trustees and various administrators at the College. The lawsuit revolves around a speech that plaintiff Jonathan Lopez delivered in class to fulfill an open-ended assignment for the course. His speech focused on his Christian beliefs including beliefs that marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman. Prof. Matteson had already made clear to the class that he was a supporter of same-sex marriage. Lopez believes that sharing his Christian beliefs is a religious duty.

The complaint Lopez v. Candaele, (CD CA, filed 2/11/2009) (full text) alleges that Prof. Matteson refused to permit Lopez to complete his speech, called him a "fascist bastard" and, instead of entering a grade on an evaluation sheet, wrote that Lopez should "ask God" for his grade. An appeal to the dean was unavailing. It led to threats of retaliation by Matteson and claims by administrators that Lopez was engaged in hate speech. The lawsuit challenges both the actions taken against Lopez and the College's speech code as violations of the 1st and 14th Amendments. Alliance Defense Fund issued a release yesterday reporting on the case and linking to additional background materials.

European Court Says Russia Violated Rights of Unification Church Missionary

Yesterday the European Court of Human Rights in Nolan and K. v. Russia, (ECHR, Feb. 12, 2009), ruled that Russia violated Sec. 1, Article 9 (freedom of thought, conscience and religion), as well as various other provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights, when it refused to readmit to the country an American missionary. Patrick Francis Nolan had worked in the country for 8 years with youth organizations affiliated with the Unification Church. Russia claimed that Nolan had engaged in activities that posed a security threat. However it never specified the nature of those activities. As summarized by the Court's press release on the decision:

Given the primary religious nature of the applicant’s activities and the general policy as set out in the Concept of National Security of the Russian Federation, that is to say that foreign missionaries posed a threat to national security, the Court considered it established that Mr Nolan's banning from Russia had been designed to repress the exercise of his right to freedom of religion. However, since the interests of national security were deliberately omitted as a permitted ground for restrictions on the exercise of the right to freedom of religion in Article 9 of the Convention, such interests could not be relied upon as a justification for the measures taken by the Russian authorities against Mr Nolan.

[Thanks to Institute on Religion & Public Policy for the lead.]