Objective coverage of church-state and religious liberty developments, with extensive links to primary sources.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Ave Maria Law School Claims Ministerial Exception
[UPDATED] Obama Picks Camp David Church As His Home Congregation; White House Denies Story
UPDATE: At Monday's press briefing (full text), White House press secretary Robert Gibbs denied most of the Time story, saying:
There have been no formal decisions about joining a church. I think I've mentioned in here in the past couple of weeks that when he goes to Camp David he has attended services at the chapel there, he enjoys the pastor there. They're not formally joining that church and there have been no formal decisions on joining a church in this area.[Thanks to commenter on this posting for the lead.]
I will say I think one aspect of the article that is true, as I mentioned here in that same discussion, was the concern that the President continues to have about the disruptive nature of his presence on any particular Sunday in some churches around the area. I think that was discussed in the article. And I know he is -- I think obviously he shares the strong belief that there's a very personal nature to one's spirituality. And for it to be -- for his presence to be disruptive, I think he believes that takes away from the experience that others might get and he certainly doesn't want to do that....
I think they will continue to look for a formal church home. I think when he's at Camp David, he'll continue to go to the chapel there. He has told us that he greatly enjoys that.
Report Says Many Muslim Marriages In Britain Are Unregistered
Relatives Challenge Will Leaving Woman's Assets to Catholic Order
Recent Articles of Interest
- Mohammad Fadel, Political Liberalism, Islamic Family Law and Family Law Pluralism: Lessons from New York on Family Law Arbitration, (in Marriage and Divorce in a Multicultural Context: Reconsidering the Boundaries of Civil Law and Religion, Joel A. Nichols, ed., Cambridge University Press, Forthcoming 2010).
- Marc R. Poirier, Name Calling: Identifying Stigma and the 'Civil Union'/'Marriage' Distinction,(Connecticut Law Review, Vol. 41, 2009).
From SmartCILP:
- Yehiel S. Kaplan, A Father's Consent to the Marriage of His Minor Daughter: Feminism and Multiculturalism in Jewish Law, 18 Southern California Review of Law & Social Justice 393-460 (2009).
- Liaquat Ali Khan, Jurodynamics of Islamic Law, 61 Rutgers Law Review 231-293 (2009).
- Mark Strasser, The Coercion Test: On Prayer, Offense, and Doctrinal Inculcation, 53 St. Louis University Law Journal 417-483 (2009).
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Indian Court Says Church May Not Be Required To Obtain Permit To Hold Worship Services
Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases
In Rowe v. Bell, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52516 (ND IN, June 19, 2009), an Indiana federal district court refused to dismiss an inmate’s claim that practices which prevent him from attending or from viewing (on television) religious services, from fellowship with other inmates, and from regularly reading religious books violate RLUIPA.
In Bonnell v. Burnett, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27586 (ED MI, March 31, 2009), a Michigan federal district court concluded that a triable question of fact existed as to whether an inmate's professed need for a kosher diet was based on a sincerely held religious belief.
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Russia Tells Court It Lacks Jurisdiction Over Chabad's Claim Against It
Canadian Supreme Court Says Law Imposing Medical Treatment Over Minor's Objection Is Constitutional
A concurring opinion by Chief Justice McLachlin and Justice Rothstein concluded that while legislative authorization of treatment over a minor's sincere religious objections amounts to an infringement of religious freedom under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, it is a justifiable infringement. "[T]he objective of ensuring the health and safety and of preserving the lives of vulnerable young people children is pressing and substantial, and the means chosen — giving discretion to the court to order treatment after a consideration of all relevant circumstances — is a proportionate limit on the right."
A dissent by Justice Binnie argued that in the case of a mature minor under 16, as here, rights of autonomy and religious freedom are violated by an irrebuttable presumption that a person under 16 lacks the capacity to make treatment decisions. Reuters on Friday reported on the decision.
State Department Appoints Special Representative To Muslim Communities
Friday, June 26, 2009
Court Finds No Jurisidiction Over Defamation Claim By Priest
While it is possible that resolution of plaintiff’s claims would not require any interpretation of the Catholic Church’s doctrine, resolving this dispute would involve the secular court interfering with the Church’s internal disciplinary proceedings where plaintiff’s claims are based on the Does’ statements, which were provided solely within the Church’s proceedings.(See prior related posting.)
Court Says School Board Invocations Governed By "Legislative Prayer" Standards
In this opinion, the court held that plaintiffs, attendees at school board meetings, have standing to bring the lawsuit. Second it concluded that the question of the propriety of the School Board's invocation policy is governed by the legislative prayer principles of Marsh v. Chambers, rather than the school-classroom prayer restrictions imposed by Lemon v. Kurtzman (despite the fact that students occasionally attend Board meetings). This still left open, in the court's view, the question of whether the School Board's policy "exploits the prayer opportunity to proselytize or advance Christianity, or to disparage other faiths or beliefs" and "whether the School Board has violated its own speaker selection policy by reaching outside the Parish to Christian clergy but not other clergy of other faiths." AP yesterday reported on the decision.
Trial Court Abused Its Discretion In Scope of Relief In Church Dispute
most of the issues First Assembly raises do not implicate ecclesiastical matters and can be resolved by resort to neutral principles of law and the plain reading of First Assembly’s governing documents. We nonetheless conclude that the trial court abused its discretion in issuing the seven mandates First Assembly challenges, and vacate those portions of the court's order and remand this matter to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
British Appeals Court Says Jewish School's Admission Criteria Are Racial, Not Religious
E.R. (On the Application of E) v. The Governing Body of JFS, (Ct. App., June 25, 2009), involved a challenge by parents of a boy who was not admitted to the Jewish Free School because it refused to recognize the validity of his mother's conversion to Judaism conducted in a Progressive, rather than an Orthodox, synagogue. The court wrote:
The OCR considers that there are two essential ways in which a person may be or become a Jew. One is descent from parents whose own identity as Jews can be established or inferred. The other is by conversion in accordance with the tenets of Orthodox Judaism. ....Reporting on the decision, Politics.co says that the school will seek leave to appeal. British Chief Rabbi Sir Jonathan Sacks criticized the ruling, saying that the school's criteria have "nothing to do with race and everything to do with religion."
One of the great evils against which the successive Race Relations Acts have been directed is the evil of anti-Semitism. None of the parties to these proceedings wants or can afford to put up a case which would result in discrimination against Jews not being discrimination on racial grounds....
M was refused admission to JFS because his mother, and therefore he, was not regarded as Jewish.... There are of course theological reasons why M is not regarded as Jewish, but they are not the ground of non-admission: they are the motive for adopting it.....
it appears to us clear (a) that Jews constitute a racial group defined principally by ethnic origin and additionally by conversion, and (b) that to discriminate against a person on the ground that he or someone else either is or is not Jewish is therefore to discriminate against him on racial grounds. The motive for the discrimination, whether benign or malign, theological or supremacist, makes it no less and no more unlawful. Nor does the factuality of the ground. If for theological reasons a fully subscribed Christian faith school refused to admit a child on the ground that, albeit practising Christians, the child's family were of Jewish origin, it is hard to see what answer there could be to a claim for race discrimination.
The refusal of JFS to admit M was accordingly, in our judgment, less favourable treatment of him on racial grounds. This does not mean ... that no Jewish faith school can ever give preference to Jewish children. It means that, as one would expect, eligibility must depend on faith, however defined, and not on ethnicity.
Senate Judiciary Committe Holds Hearing On Hate Crimes Bill
Now some have worried that in passing this legislation we would be declaring illegal the considered religious opinions of many Americans who believe that homosexual behavior is contrary to the will of God. I will say to you that my own Presbyterian Church is passionately committed to preserving the right of all people to believe and follow their religious convictions freely without the interference of the Federal Government. If I believed for one minute that the effect of this bill was to curtail legitimate religious expression or observance, I would not touch it with a ten-foot pole.
But that is not the effect of this bill! Section 10 contains explicit language stating that "nothing in this Act shall be construed to prohibit any constitutionally protected speech, expressive conduct or activities." Those constitutional protections are effective. We have had federal hate crime legislation on the books for forty years in this country.... But not once in all of these forty years... have I ever seen someone brought up on charges solely because of something they said.
The Matthew Shepard Act targets not speech or thought or religious expression, but violent crime. We are talking here about physical assault on the person of another solely because of who they are. Violent attacks on another person are not a legitimate expression of anyone's religious belief, Christian or otherwise. There is nothing in this legislation for law-abiding Christians to fear.
German Government Adopts Suggestions For Muslim Accommodation In Schools
In Dispute With Defecting Church, Assemblies of God Held To Be Hierarchical
Report Says FBI Will Use ISNA As Contact Point With US Muslim Community
Court Says Revenue Bonds For Religious College OK Under Establishment Clause
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Gov. Sanford's Press Conference and Wife's Response Contain Extensive Religious References
And from Mrs. Sanford:I am here because if you were to look at God's laws, there are in every instance designed to protect people from themselves. I think that that is the bottom line with God's law -- that it's not a moral, rigid list of dos and don'ts just for the heck of dos and don'ts. It is indeed to protect us from ourselves.... That sin is in fact grounded in this notion of what is it that I want, as opposed to somebody else.
And in this regard, let me throw one more apology out there, and that is to people of faith across South Carolina, or for that matter, across the nation, because I think that one of the big disappointments when, believe it or not, I've been a person of faith all my life, if somebody falls within the -- the fellowship of believers or the walk of faith, I think it makes it that much harder for believers to say, "Well, where was that person coming from?" Or folks that weren't believers to say, "Where, indeed, was that person coming from?" So one more apology in there.
But I -- I guess where I'm trying to go with this is that there are moral absolutes, and that God's law indeed is there to protect you from yourself. And there are consequences if you breach that. This press conference is a consequence.
Psalm 127 states that sons are a gift from the Lord and children a reward from Him. I will continue to pour my energy into raising our sons to be honorable young men. I remain willing to forgive Mark completely for his indiscretions and to welcome him back, in time, if he continues to work toward reconciliation with a true spirit of humility and repentance.
This is a very painful time for us and I would humbly request now that members of the media respect the privacy of my boys and me as we struggle together to continue on with our lives and as I seek the wisdom of Solomon, the strength and patience of Job and the grace of God in helping to heal my family.