French Trial of Gang Members Accused of Anti-Semitic Torture Is Closed To Press

In France, a court has made the controversial decision to bar journalists from the trial of gang members accused of kidnapping and torturing to death a 23-year-old French Jew, Ilan Halimi. (Background.) A report yesterday by JTA says that Halimi's family and the French Jewish community want the trial opened in order to raise awareness of anti-Semitism in France. However, because two of the 27 defendants were juveniles in 2006 when the crimes were committed, French law permits the trial to be closed. Apparently members of the Barbarians gang targeted Halimi because they believed Jews would be worth a large ransom. One of the questions in the trial of the gang's leader, Youssour Fofna, is whether this constitutes a crime based on Halimi's religion or ethnicity. Author Alexandre Lévy says: "Politically it's very delicate in France to be the first to talk about anti-Semitism. It's like the nuclear button."

"Joe the Plumber" Gives His Views on Religion and Politics

Monday's Christianity Today carries an interview with Samuel Wurzelbacher , who became known as "Joe the Plumber"-- the symbol of the average American-- in the 2008 Presidential campaign. Wurzelbacher answers questions regarding his Christian faith and his view of the future of the Republican Party. After saying that "the Founding Fathers based the Constitution off of Christian values," Wurzelbacher opines that the Republican Party is not reaching out enough to evangelicals. His favorite Christian leader is James Dobson. He says: "When politicians start talking about being a Christian, I just worry, because a lot of them don't really follow through.... I would love to hear our leaders actually check with God before he does stuff." On whether he plans to run for political office: "Not right now. God hasn't said, 'Joe, I want you to run.'"

New Website On "Islamic Lawfare"

The Middle East Forum today announced the launch of a new website, The Legal Project. The website features primary source material and analysis on "Islamic lawfare," described as:

attempts by supporters of radical Islam to suppress free discourse on Islam and terrorism by (1) exploiting Western legal systems and traditions and (2) recruiting state actors and international organizations such as the United Nations.

I have added the website to the "Resources" section of the Religion Clause sidebar.

Turkish Author Tried In Abstentia For Insulting Religious Values

AFP today reports that in Istanbul, Turkish author Nedim Gursel goes on trial in abstentia charged under Art. 216 of the Turkish Penal Code with insulting the religious values of the people. The charges grow out of Gursel's novel "The Daughters of Allah." Gursel currently lives in France. Hurriyet reports that a Religious Affairs Directorate committee concluded that the book "was insulting and sarcastic, humiliating Allah, its prophets, divine religions, worshipping, holy books and religious principles. This cannot be explained in the scope of freedom of thought or criticism."

Leaders In Hungary Propose Ban on Holocaust Denial and Hate Speech

In Hungary, Ildiko Lendvai, leader of the governing Socialist Party, told a May Day celebration last Friday that her party plans to propose a constitutional amendment to ban Holocaust denial and hate speech. MTI reports that the move follows a Holocaust denial demonstration held in Budapest two weeks ago by right-wing organizations including the Magyar Garda Movement.

Claims By Chuch Founder Against City Employees Dismissed

In Kovalev v. City of Philadelphia, (ED PA, April 29, 2009), a Pennsylvania federal district court dismissed a series of constitutional claims brought by Sergei Kovalev against the city and several city employees challenging inspection attempts and the refusal of a building permit for a small additional structure on property that contained his home as well as operations of his "International Church of Eternal Revival ." In the lawsuit, filed pro se, Kovalev claimed the inspection was instigated by a state senator whose office was nearby and that he is a victim of discrimination because he is a foreign born U.S. citizen from Eastern Europe. He says any construction was "done in an act of worship to God." The court found a lack of evidence to support his 1st, 4th and 14th Amendment claims and held that individual defendants had qualified immunity.

Cert. Denied In Challenge To Marijuana Laws

The U.S. Supreme Court today denied certiorari in Olsen v. Holder, (Docket No. 08-777) (Order List.) In the case (captioned below as Olsen v. Mukasey) the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals held that plaintiff's attempt to enjoin enforcement against him of the federal and Iowa's controlled substances acts should be dismissed. Plaintiff, a member of the Ethiopian Zion Coptic Church, uses marijuana for sacramental purposes. (See prior posting.) Meanwhile, in a different approach, plaintiff has attempted in both state and federal forums to require marijuana to be removed as a Schedule I controlled substance now that a number of states recognize its legitimacy for medical use. The attempts have met varying degrees of success. (See prior posting.)

Controversy Continues Over UNLV's Proposed Policy On Bias Incidents

At the University of Nevada Las Vegas, faculty concern continues over the University's proposed Policy on Bias Incidents and Hate Crimes. The draft defines a "bias incidents" as:

verbal, written, or physical acts of intimidation, coercion, interference, frivolous claims, discrimination, and sexual or other harassment motivated, in whole or in part, by bias based on actual or perceived race, ethnicity, color, religion, creed, sex (including gender identity or expression, or a pregnancy related condition), sexual orientation, national origin, military status or military obligations, disability (including veterans with service-connected disabilities), age, marital status, physical appearance, political affiliation, or on the basis of exercise of rights secured by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.... Bias incidents do not include statements made on controversial issues that serve to promote intellectual inquiry into those issues. While such statements and related discussion can cause feelings of discomfort, a "reasonable person" can and must differentiate these statements from bias incidents.

The draft encourages reporting of bias incidents to UNLV police. After the ACLU of Nevada criticized the draft as an unconstitutional infringement on free speech, Nevada's chancellor of public higher education called for the policy to be rewritten. (Las Vegas Sun, 4/27). But now faculty are concerned that UNLV President David Ashley chose Christine Clark, the vice president of diversity and inclusion, to head a task force to review the draft. She helped develop the initial draft, and critics say she ignored their concerns at that time. (Las Vegas Sun, 5/4). The policy was drafted in response to a call by the state Board of Regents last year for all state schools to develop policies on bias incidents. (Las Vegas Sun, 4/25.)

Pakistan Islamists Reject Sharia Court Set Up By Government In Peace Deal

Last month, the government of Pakistan entered an agreement with Taliban insurgents to set up Islamic courts in the Malakand Division of the North West Frontier Province in order to end fighting there. (See prior posting.) Voice of America reports that on Saturday, Pakistani authorities implemented the agreement by setting up an Islamic appellate court and appointing two senior judges to it. However Sufi Mohammad who mediated the agreement rejected the announcement saying that the government is not competent to appoint Islamic judges without first consulting him as senior cleric. He also said the government's ongoing offensive against the Taliban was to have been halted before the court was set up. Taliban say they will not lay down their arms until those conditions are met. The government says that private individuals cannot be involved in process of appointing judges.

Pope Travels To Jordan, Israel, West Bank At End of This Week

Pope Benedict XVI will be visiting the Middle East beginning the end of this week. He will be in Jordan from May 8 to 11. (Tidings Online.) Then he moves on to visit Israel and the West Bank from May 11 to 15, . The Israel Ministry of Tourism has set up a website with information about this portion of the Pontiff's trip. The website includes Benedict's itinerary and presumably will be updated with reports during his trip. The Forward last week previewed the visit in an article titled Pope's Visit to Israel Fraught With Potential Minefields. And Politics Daily today has a lengthy review of the religious, political and personal issues that confront the Pope on the trip. Meanwhile Zenit yesterday reported that the Pope will deliver 29 discourses and homilies during his week in the Middle East, and will meet with both government officials and representatives of Christianity, Islam and Judaism.

Recent Articles and Books of Interest

From SSRN:

• Jessie Hill, Of Christmas Trees and Corpus Christi: Ceremonial Deism and Change in Meaning over Time, (Duke Law Journal, Vol. 59, January 2010).


• Caroline Mala Corbin, The First Amendment Right Against Compelled Listening, (Boston University Law Review, Vol. 89, 2009).

From SmartCILP and elsewhere:

• Mohamed R. Hassanien, International Law Fights Terrorism in the Muslim World: A Middle Eastern Perspective, 36 Denver Journal of International Law & Policy 221-253 (2008).


• Frank Ravitch, Playing the Proof Game: Intelligent Design and the Law, 113 Penn State Law Review 841-897 (2009).


• Mark Strasser, The Protection and Alienation of Religious Minorities: On the Evolution of the Endorsement Test, 2008 Michigan State Law Review 667-724.


• Symposium--First Amendment Rights in America's Public Schools: From the Schoolhouse Gate to the Courthouse Steps. Welcoming remarks by Rex R. Perschbacher and Alan Brownstein; articles by Vikram David Amer, Kenneth Starr, R. George Wright, Alan Brownstein, Erwin Chemerinsky, Steven K. Green, Joan W. Howarth, Melissa Rogers and Steven D. Smith. 42 UC Davis Law Review 631-1057 (2009).


• Symposium: Islam, Democracy, and Nation Building. Articles by Joseph N. Kickasola, John H. Johns, Stephen Schwartz, Mehrangiz Kar, Thomas Najjar and Jennifer Jefferis; note by Eva M. Robinson. 6 Regent Journal of International Law 271-499 (2008).


• Brian Leiter, Why Tolerate Religion?, 25 Constitutional Commentary 1-27 (2008).

New Books:

• John Witte, The Sins of the Fathers: The Law and Theology of Illegitimacy Reconsidered, (Cambridge Univ. Press, April 2009), reviewed by the Center for the Study of Law and Religion.


• T. Jeremy Gunn, Spiritual Weapons: The Cold War and the Forging of an American National Religion, (Praeger Publishers, Dec. 2008), reviewed by the Center for the Study of Law and Religion.

Q&A on Hate Crimes Bill Seeks To Reassure Religious Leaders

Third Way has recently issued a memo titled Questions and Answers about the Hate Crimes Bill for People of Faith. It attempts to alleviate concerns raised particularly by conservative Christian groups about religious freedom and the Hate Crimes Prevention Act that has recently passed the House. (See prior posting). The memo concludes that pastors could not be prosecuted under the bill for preaching that homosexuality is an abomination, or saying that gay people will go to hell. It points to specific language in the bill, language of the House Report and the special role of the 1st Amendment. The memo also points out that the bill expands protection against religiously motivated hate crimes:

Current federal law only protects against hate crimes based on
religion if the person was targeted because they were engaged in a federally protected activity like voting or going to school. The legislation under consideration by Congress would remove that limitation.

[Thanks to Michael Lieberman for the lead.]

5th Circuit: Prison's Rules On Buddhist Services May Violate RLUIPA

In Newby v. Quarterman, (5th Cir., April 30, 2009), the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a Buddhist inmate's challenge to Texas prison rules that require religious services in his prison unit to be conducted by either a chaplain or an approved religious volunteer. There were no approved religious volunteers for Buddhist ceremonies, and the regular chaplain refused to conduct Buddhist ceremonies because he is unfamiliar with Buddhist religious practices and was occupied by other obligations. Ruling on plaintiff's claim under RLUIPA, the court held that there is a reasonable basis for a fact finder to conclude that the outside-volunteer policy creates a substantial burden on plaintiff's free exercise and that Texas has not furthered its interest in prison safety and security through the least restrictive means. The court also reversed the district court's dismissal of plaintiff's free exercise and equal protection challenges to the prison's outside-volunteer policy.

1st Amendment Challenge To Termination of Parental Rights Dismissed

In Haines v. New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36331 (D NH, April 28, 2009), a New Hampshire federal magistrate judge held that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine deprives the federal court of jurisdiction to review a state court's termination of a mother's parental rights and rulings on visitation. She raised 1st Amendment objections to the state's order, saying that the state court's rulings were based on her religious objection to undergoing a mental health evaluation that was based on principles of secular psychology or psychiatry.

Zoning Challenge Dismissed On Ripeness Grounds

In Miles Christi Religious Order v. Northville Township, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36228 (ED MI, April 30, 2009), a Michigan federal district court dismissed as unripe a challenge to a Township's zoning determination classifying as a small church the house where Miles Christi priests and monks reside and conduct classes and services. Miles Christi, a Catholic religious order, challenged the determination as a violation of RLUIPA, the 1st and 14th Amendments and various provisions of the Michigan constitution. The court found that plaintiffs had not appealed to the zoning board of appeals the township's determination that a change to a more intensive use of the property had occurred. Nor did they submit a site plan or seek a variance or other administrative relief from the zoning board of appeals.

New Approach Attempted In Challenge To Drug Laws By Religious Users

In Olsen v. Holder, (SD IA, April 27, 2009), a priest in the Ethiopian Zion Coptic Church-- which employs marijuana in its religious rituals-- attempted a new approach in challenging federal laws banning marijuana use. Instead of asserting free exercise claims, he sought a declaratory judgment and injunction against continuing marijuana as a Schedule I drug under federal law. (Background on Controlled Substances Act.) He alleged that marijuana is only appropriately listed on Schedule I if it has "no currently accepted medical use in the United States," and that now 12 states have enacted laws finding that it does have medical uses. The court, however, dismissed the case on jurisdictional grounds, holding that the appropriate route to raise the issue is to appeal to the appropriate Court of Appeals a refusal by the DEA to reschedule marijuana. An appeal by plaintiff of a refusal by the DEA is already proceeding on a parallel track. (See prior related posting.)

UPDATE: In McMahon v. Iowa Board of Pharmacy, (IA Dist. Ct., April 21, 2009), an Iowa state court reviewed a state pharmacy board's action on rescheduling of marijuana under state law and remanded the case to the Board, holding that it must recommend rescheduling to the legislature if it finds that marijuana has an accepted medical use in the U.S. and is safe for use under medical supervision. Plaintiff in the federal case discussed above was an intervenor in the state case. The pleadings and briefs in the case are available here. Extensive background documents, pleadings and briefs in the attempt to obtain federal reclassification are available here. (Also the link in the original posting has been changed to a version of the opinion that is available without a LEXIS subscription.)

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Johnson v. Killian, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34670 (SD NY, April 21, 2009), a New York federal district court rejected for failure to exhaust administrative remedies plaintiffs' objections to Muslim inmates being limited to performing congregational prayer once a day, five times per week, and limits on their ability to pray individually in their cells.

A series of similar screening opinions have recently been released by a California federal magistrate judge. In each, she dismisses the complaint, with leave to amend, holding (among other things) that plaintiff has failed to adequately allege that prison restrictions being challenged infringe on his sincerely held religious beliefs. Each of the following is from Magistrate Judge Sandra M. Snyder in the Central District of California: Chavez v. Ahlin, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35063 (April 8, 2009); Languein v. Ahlin, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35060 (April 8, 2009); Sanchez v. Ahlin, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35062 (April 8, 2009); Oliverez v. Albitre, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35050 (April 7, 2009); Sumahit v. Ahlin, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35205 (April 9, 2009); Angulo v. Ahlin, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35452 (April 9, 2009).

In Ellington v. Director of Corrections, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34895 (ED CA, March 30, 2009), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed, on grounds of failure to comply with the procedural rule on joinder, plaintiff's claim that he was denied a kosher diet in compliance with his faith, which consists of House of Yahweh, Kaballah, and Hebrew/Islam. Plaintiff was given leave to refile amended complaints.

In Cowart v. Gonzales, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34991 (MD GA, Feb. 24, 2009), a Georgia federal magistrate judge recommended granting summary judgment to defendant in a lawsuit claiming that authorities seized religious material from plaintiff's cell and subsequently had the materials destroyed. The court found that plaintiff had failed to exhaust his administrative remedies as to this claim. Another claim alleging withholding of religious mail for one day was dismissed as not interfering with plaintiff's free exercise of religion.

UPI reported last week that a Nebraska judge refused a state prisoner's request to change his name for religious reasons to "Sinner Lawrence Bilskirnir." Plaintiff is an adherent of the Norse religion.

Utah High Court Finds Church's Theft of Funds Violates Anti-Racketeering Statute

In Hill v. Estate of Owen A. Allred, (UT Sup. Ct., May 1, 2009), the Utah Supreme Court held that an elaborate scheme by a religious group and some of its followers to steal $1.54 million from a woman who thought the funds were being used to purchase a ranch violates Utah's Pattern of Unlawful Activity Act. The statute, Utah Code Ann. § 76-10-1605, allows an award of double damages and attorneys' fees to plaintiff, Virginia Hill, who was injured by a pattern of unlawful activity. Drawing on federal precedent, the court rejected defendants' claim that conversion of Hill's money involved only a single episode of criminal activity.

The court also reversed the trial court's holding that Hill could not be awarded punitive damages because of "unclean hands." She had failed to produce tax returns showing she had paid taxes on the funds converted by defendants. Since the damages she was awarded were not based on doctrines of equity, the court concluded that "the hygiene of her hands was never at issue." Friday's Salt Lake Tribune reports on the decision.

Canadian Court Orders More Hearings On Whether Witness Can Wear Niqab

Toronto's Globe and Mail and the National Post report on a decision handed down last Thursday by Ontario's Superior Court of Justice on whether a Muslim woman should be allowed to testify in court with her face fully covered by a niqab. The Toronto-area woman wants to testify with her face veiled at the trial of two men charged with sexually assaulting her when she was a child. A Provincial Court judge refused her request, finding that she was motivated more by comfort than by religious belief. The Superior Court reversed the decision, instructing the Provincial Court to hold two hearings-- one on whether the woman's beliefs are sincere, and a second on whether the evidence rules permit introduction of testimony from a veiled witness.

Australian Court Rejects Muslim Man's Claim of Invalidity of Marriage

The Family Court of Australia has handed down an interesting decision in Wold & Kleppir, ([2009] FamCA 178, Feb. 6, 2009), a case in which a husband defended against his wife's claim for a property settlement by asserting that the couple were never validly married. The court rejected husband's claim that he believed the ceremony performed by an Imam was merely one to convert to Islam the woman with whom he was living and with whom he had fathered two children. The court concluded that the husband "well knew it was a ceremony of marriage."

The court also rejected a a second argument made by husband. He claimed that the marriage is invalid because it is potentially polygamous, since any Muslim man in Australia can take up to 4 wives. The court accepted the argument by wife's counsel that this would lead to the absurd result of every Muslim marriage in Australia being invalid. Today's Australian reports on the decision.