Cert. Denied In High School Bible Club, Missouri Funeral Picketing, Cases

The U.S. Supreme Court yesterday denied certiorari in two companion cases, Truth v. Kent School District, (Docket No. 08-1130) and Kent School District v. Truth, (Docket No. 08-1268) (Order List). In the case, the 9th Circuit upheld the application of a Seattle, Washington school's rules against religious discrimination to Truth, a Bible study club. The organization was denied recognition as a student group because its charter limits membership to those who sign a statement of fundamentalist Christian faith. (See prior posting.) Yesterday's Seattle Times reported on the decision.

Separately yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in Nixon v. Phelps-Roper, (Docket No. 08-1244) (Order List). In the case, the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals had granted members of the Westboro Baptist Church a preliminary injunction against enforcement of Missouri's anti-funeral picketing law. (See prior posting.) Yesterday's Christian Science Monitor reported on the decision.

LAPD Appoints First Muslim Chaplain

The Los Angeles Police Department has appointed its first Muslim chaplain-- Shiek Qazi Asad. Yesterday's Los Angeles Times reports that Asad applied for the volunteer position of reserve chaplain as part of his long-standing efforts to improve relations between Muslims and Los Angeles law enforcement. Fewer than 1% of LAPD officers ar Muslim.

Ave Maria Law School Claims Ministerial Exception

AveWatch earlier this month reported on the unusual defense mounted by Ave Maria University in a lawsuit against it by a law professor Stephen Safranek whose tenure and employment were terminated. In a motion to dismiss (full text) filed June 1, Ave Maria claims that it is a religious institution and that the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine precludes civil court jurisdiction in the case. The motion argues that Ave Maria faculty were ministerial employees as a matter of law because the Law School's Faculty Handbook required them to integrate the moral and social teachings of the Catholic Church Plaintiff's response to the motion calls it "so untenable it is difficult to absorb on one reading."

[UPDATED] Obama Picks Camp David Church As His Home Congregation; White House Denies Story

After a 5-month search, President Barack Obama has decided to make Evergreen Chapel, the non-denominational church at Camp David, his primary place of worship. Time today reports that the unexpected move was motivated in large part by a desire to worship without being on display, as would be the case if he joined a Washington, DC congregation. Evergreen Chapel is open to the families of the 400 military personnel at Camp David. Navy chaplain Lieut. Carey Cash currently leads services at Evergreen Chapel. The Navy rotates chaplains through this assignment every three years. In picking Evergreen Chapel, Obama followed the choice of Pres. George W. Bush. Lieut. Cash is not likely to be Obama's primary spiritual advisor. Instead he seems to be relying on a small group of pastors with whom he keeps in touch.

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.

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.

[Thanks to commenter on this posting for the lead.]

Report Says Many Muslim Marriages In Britain Are Unregistered

A report issued today by the British think tank Civitas says that some two-thirds of Muslim marriages in Britain are not being registered as required under the Marriages Act. These marriages are performed in smaller informal sharia courts outside the formal group of Muslim arbitration tribunals operating in four British cities. According to UTV News, the Civitas report says that an imam who conducts an unregistered marriage and then advises on disputes within that marriage is in breach of the law. Civitas has also issued a release on its new report.

Relatives Challenge Will Leaving Woman's Assets to Catholic Order

Yesterday's Hartford Courant reports that relatives of Gabrielle Mee are challenging her will that left all her property to the Connecticut-based to the Legionaries of Christ. Relatives discovered that Mee, who died last year at age 96, already had turned over some $7.5 million in cash and property to the Legionaries. Relatives say that Mee would never have left her assets to the order if she had known the truth about a sex scandal involving its founder, the Rev. Marcial Maciel Degollado, who was accused of molesting at least nine boys in seminaries in Spain and Italy in the 1950s and '60s. They say the Legionaries is a cult that kept the deeply religious Mee isolated.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• 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).

Indian Court Says Church May Not Be Required To Obtain Permit To Hold Worship Services

Zee News yesterday reported on a decision by the Madras High Court in India holding that district officials could not require a church to obtain a permit before conducting prayers inside its own building. The court ordered the Kanyakumari Revenue Divisional Officer not to interfere with prayers inside church premises, but told the church it should seek permission if it planned to take a procession outside of its building.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Chavis v. Goord, (2d Cir., June 25, 2009), the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed an inmate's claim that his free exercise rights were infringed when he was required to work on Sundays. The court found both a lack of exhaustion of administrative remedies and failure to allege any specific burden on religious beliefs.

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.

Russia Tells Court It Lacks Jurisdiction Over Chabad's Claim Against It

Last year, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals held that the parent organization for the Orthodox Jewish Chabad movement can pursue its claims against the Russian government to recover two historic collections of Jewish religious books and manuscripts that were seized in violation of international law. (See prior posting.) In January, the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. ordered Russia to preserve the documents after Chabad feared they were not being properly cared for and might be sold on the black market. AP reports that in a filing on Friday, the Russian government told the court that in order to protect its sovereignty, it will not participate in the U.S. proceedings. Russia says that the U.S. should use diplomatic channels to deal with any dispute, arguing that U.S. courts lack authority to enter orders with respect to property owned by the Russian government.

Canadian Supreme Court Says Law Imposing Medical Treatment Over Minor's Objection Is Constitutional

In a 6-1 decision Thursday, Canada’s Supreme Court upheld Manitoba’s law that allows a court to order medical treatment for a child under 16 that it considers to be in the child’s best interest, despite the child’s religious objections. In A.C. v. Director of Child and Family Services, (Can. Sup. Ct., June 26, 2009), a case involving a 14-year old Jehovah's Witness who objected to a blood transfusion, Justice LeBel’s opinion for 4 justices concluded that the statute creates a proper constitutional balance between autonomy and the government's interest in protecting a vulnerable child from harm. The opinion held that the "best interest" standard mandated by the law involves a sliding scale of scrutiny, with the child's views becoming more important as the child becomes more mature. A child's religious heritage is one of the factors the court must examine in determining the child's best interest.

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

The U.S. State Department on Friday announced the appointment of Farah Pandith to head the new Office of the United States Special Representative to Muslim Communities. Pandith, a Muslim, was born in India and immigrated to the U.S. with her parents. Previously she served on the White House National Security Council where she was involved with outreach to Muslims and combating extremism, and then worked in the State Department on issues of Muslim engagement in the European and Eurasian region. According to the Washington Post, the new appointment was announced on Tuesday in an internal State Department e-mail, and was announced more widely after a reporter asked about it. The Economic Times of India reports that Pandith’s extended family in Kashmir is very proud of her new position.

Court Finds No Jurisidiction Over Defamation Claim By Priest

In Stepek v. Doe, (IL App., June 10, 2009), an Illinois Appellate Court held that civil courts have no jurisdiction over a suit brought by a Catholic priest alleging defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The allegedly false statements were made only to Chicago Archdiocese personnel in connection with the Church's formal investigation of alleged sexual abuse by plaintiff. The court explained:

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 John Doe # 2 v. Tangipahoa Parish School Board, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53189 (ED LA, June 24, 2009), a Louisiana federal district court made important rulings of law in a challenge to a school-board's invocation policy, but denied both sides' motions for summary judgement. The court ordered a trial to determine whether the Tangipahoa Parish School Board's current policy of opening its meetings with prayer violates the Establishment Clause. Tangipahoa Parish has been involved in extensive litigation over school prayer for a number of years.

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

First Assembly of God Christian Center of Pittsburg, California v. Bridgeway, (CA Ct. App., June 24, 2009) involves, in the court's words, "a secular dispute dressed as a schism." At issue is the validity of the election of a board of directors and of Tim Combs as senior pastor of the church, here challenged through a summary proceeding under the non-profit provisions of California Corporations Code Sec. 9418. The Church operated on two campuses, and Combs' supporters wanted to separate one of the campuses and operate it under Combs' leadership. According to the court, "Counsel for both sides agreed that First Assembly was a 'sovereign' church, but disagreed as to whether the Board or the church members were empowered to ultimately resolve their dispute." The trial court had ordered that a new membership meeting be held and had issued seven mandates to stabilize the situation at the church pending the outcome of the meeting-- to be presided over by a court-appointed special master. On appeal, the Court of Appeals, in a 54-page opinion, held that:

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

In an important decision yesterday, the Court of Appeal of England and Wales held that an Orthodox Jewish school's admissions criterion that favors only children considered Jewish by the Office of the Chief Rabbi amounts to racial, rather than religious, discrimination. Faith schools receiving public funding are exempted from legal prohibitions on religious discrimination, but not racial discrimination. The school's rule thus was found to violate the Race Relations Act 1976.

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. ....

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.

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."

Senate Judiciary Committe Holds Hearing On Hate Crimes Bill

Yesterday, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee held hearings on the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 (S. 909). The Justice Department has released a transcript of Attorney General Eric Holder's testimony favoring the legislation. Transcripts of statements by committee members and other witnesses are available from the Judicary Committee's website. Among these witnesses was Dr. Mark Achtemeier, Associate Professor of Systematic Theology and Ethics, University of Dubuque Theological Seminary. He said in part:

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

Reuters yesterday reported that the German government has reached agreement at the German Islam Conference with the country's largest Muslim community on recommendations for accommodating Muslim religious practices in public schools. Implementation is up to each of the German states. The recommendations include accommodating Muslim holy day observances, offering sex-segregated swim lessons and changing rooms, and furnishing parents more information about what is taught in sex education classes.

In Dispute With Defecting Church, Assemblies of God Held To Be Hierarchical

In Leach v. Johnson, (MI Ct. App., June 18, 2009), a Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court's decision holding that the Assemblies of God is an hierarchical religious organization and its decision to assert control over the property of the break-away Gospel Lighthouse Church in Warren, Michigan is binding upon the courts. The court concluded: "because Gospel Lighthouse subordinated itself to the authority of Assemblies of God, and because the Michigan District had ultimate control over Gospel Lighthouse's doctrine, status, and leadership, the trial court did not err when it determined that Assemblies of God is a hierarchical organization, thus precluding subject matter jurisdiction." [Thanks to Brian D. Wassom for the lead.]

Report Says FBI Will Use ISNA As Contact Point With US Muslim Community

IPT News yesterday reported that the FBI has decided to rely upon the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) as its official point of contact with the American Muslim community. The move comes after the FBI earlier this year broke its ties with the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) that had previously been its contact. (See prior posting.) The IPT News report objects to the FBI decision, arguing that ISNA has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.