Religion Clause

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Conservative Christian Groups Oppose Current Heath Care Reform Proposals

Liberty Counsel yesterday issued a press release endorsed by 34 other conservative Christian groups saying that "it is time to start over" on health care reform, with a "nonpartisan approach." The statement said in part:

We oppose funding for abortion. Abortion is not healthcare. We support the sanctity of human life from conception to natural death.... We support conscience laws protecting hospitals and healthcare providers from coerced participation in abortion. We oppose government policies pressuring people to forgo or limit treatment because of age or illness..... Every proposed bill funds abortion, including the so-called Baucus bill from the Senate Finance Committee. This is unacceptable. We will not support any bill that funds abortion.

... We support legal reform to stop frivolous lawsuits ...[,] portability, allowing people to take their healthcare with them so it is not tied to employment...[,] options to purchase health insurance across state lines.... We support competition; coverage of pre-existing conditions; wellness care and prevention incentives; tax relief that provides a dollar-for-dollar deduction for every dollar spent on premiums or other medical or prescription costs; and a dollar-for-dollar tax deduction with no limit from gross income for every dollar contributed to nonprofit organizations providing healthcare for free or at reduced cost to the needy..... We oppose a single-payer, government-run insurance program or the so-called public option.

Monday, October 12, 2009

Christian Scientists Want Coverage Under Health Care Reform Bill

Today's St. Petersburg (FL) Times reports on concerns of Christian Scientists as to proposed health care reforms. They want Christian Science practitioners and similar prayer-based healing covered by health insurance. Some of the drafts of health care reform legislation mandate this type of coverage. Other drafts merely exempt religious objectors from the requirement to obtain health insurance.

Two Pentecostal Churches In Britain Cited For Loud Music

In Britain, according to yesterday's London Telegraph, two Christian pentecostal churches have been served with noise abatement notices after neighbors complained about the loud music played at their services. All Nations Centre in Kennington, south London, has been told to end amplification of music and sermons. A week earlier, Immanuel International Christian Centre in Waltham Forest, north-east London, was cited and told it could play amplified music only for twenty minutes on Sundays. Attendance has gone down from 100 to 30 because of the ban. The churches say the bans are not about noise, but about silencing Christian viewpoints.

Restoring Historical Cross Explored By California City

In 1969, a wooden cross was put up on Monterey, California's Del Monte Beach to mark 200th anniversary of the raising of a wooden cross at the site by explorer Don Gaspar de Portol and Father Juan Crespi as a signal to the supply ship San Jose, expected to arrive from Mexico. Last month vandals cut down that cross. The Monterey County Herald last week reported that City Council wants to restore the cross because of its historical significance, but is concerned about possible litigation from the ACLU. Even before the vandalism, the ACLU and the city were engaged in discussions about the cross and compromise ways to keep it as a historical marker without its being an endorsement of religion. In a closed session last Tuesday, following a public hearing on the matter, City Council voted to proceed with the new cross only after raising $50,000 in contributions as a legal defense fund.

Egyptian Islamists Sue Top Cleric Over His Ban on Niqab At Al-Ahzar

As reported last week, Egypt's top cleric, Mohammed Sayyed Tantawi, announced he would ban women wearing the full face veil from entering any of the schools of Sunni Islam's premier institute of learning, al-Azhar. Today Al Arabiya reports that a Muslim brotherhood lawyer, representatives of Egypt's lower house of parliament and the Sawaseya Center for Human Rights have joined together in a lawsuit against Tantawi, claiming that his ban unconstitutionally violates personal freedom and infringes the principle of equality for all citizens. The lawsuit also names Egypt's minister of higher education and the president of Cairo University as defendants. A spokesman for al-Azhar argued that the Muslim Brotherhood is not able to sue because it is an outlawed group. He also claimed that the ban is an internal policy of al-Ahzar that outsiders have no right to challenge.

Vermont Supreme Court Remands Clergy Sex Abuse Case For New Trial, Ruling For Plaintiff

In Turner v. Roman Catholic Diocese, (VT Sup. Ct., Oct. 9, 2009), the Vermont Supreme Court held that neither the Free Exercise Clause, the Establishment Clause nor the religious autonomy doctrine bars negligent hiring or negligent supervision claims against the Catholic Diocese of Burlington, Vermont. In the clergy sexual abuse case in which the plaintiff was awarded $15,000 in damages, the Court said:

Defendant does not argue that the common law of negligence is something other than a neutral law of general applicability or that it is directed specifically towards a religious belief or practice of defendant. Nor has defendant identified a specific doctrine or practice that will be burdened if plaintiff’s suit goes forward. We do not believe defendant’s generalized assertion that requiring it to hire and supervise priests in a non-negligent manner would constitute undue interference in church governance.

Rejecting defendant's religious autonomy claim, the court said that "the claim was not brought under church law, nor did it seek to enforce the duties of defendant according to religious beliefs." The court also held that summary judgment should not be granted to defendant on statute of limitations grounds.

Finally the court held that the trial court should have excused for cause a juror who was a member of the defendant Diocese. The Court rejected the argument that permitting this challenge for cause would amount to religious discrimination. This finding led the Court to vacate the judgment and remand the case for a new trial.

Yesterday's Bennington (VT) Banner reported on this decision, as well as on another unrelated case in which a trial court jury in Chittenden, Vermont on Friday handed down a $2.2 million verdict in a suit against the same Catholic Diocese in a different clergy child molestation case.

Sunday, October 11, 2009

State Court Decision In Synagogue Dispute Leads To Self-Help

Today's Hudson Valley (NY) Times Herald-Record reports on the aftermath of a recent state appellate court decision in a lawsuit between two Hasidic synagogues in the town of Kiryas Joel. Opponents of the village's chief rabbi had for 25 years been using the former living quarters of the chief rabbi (next to the main synagogue) as their own place of worship. Apparently the house had been left to the group by the late wife of Satmar Rebbe Joel Tietelbaum. In the court decision last month, New York's Appellate Division ruled that the dissidents' use of the former home as a place of worship now requires a site plan review by the Village Zoning Board. (See prior posting.) This ruling led the main synagogue, Yetev Lev, to shut off electricty, water and sewer services to the dissident synagogue, Bais Yoel Ohel Feige.

Not deterred, members of BYOF tapped electricity from a neighboring property and ran a hose with water from there to their synagogue. Then, according to the paper's account, along came "Joseph Waldman, a onetime dissident firebrand ... who prays three times a day at the dissident synagogue." He commandeered a truck carrying portable toilets and, with fellow congregants, took the toilets onto BYOF grounds. According to the paper: "Equipped with improvised utilities, dissidents continued using the synagogue during Sukkot last week, but their Planning Board application still looms, and more legal fighting is certain."

UPDATE: BYOF has been held in contempt by a state trial court judge for continuing to use the premises without submitting a site plan for review. The court ordered the synagogue closed within 5 days. (Times Herald-Record, 12/3/2009).

Federal Jury Rejects Religious Discrimination Claim By Indiana City Employee

Friday's Chicago Tribune reports that a federal court jury sided with the Kendallville, Indiana water department in a religious discrimination lawsuit brought against it by former employee Greg Rice. Rice claimed that his supervisor, Scott Mosley, posted religious slogans in the office and repeatedly lectured him about the state of his soul. Mosley is also the pastor of a local church. However apparently the jury believed Mosley's testimony that he fired Rice for insubordination after Rice argued and hung up on a staff member of the city clerk's office.

Appellate Court Reinstates Pakistani Muslim's Employment Discrimination Claims

Taking both parties to task for the 5,415 pages of material that were before the trial court when it was called on to decide a summary judgment motion, a California appellate court nevertheless reversed the dismissal of discrimination and harassment claims brought against United Airlines by a Muslim of Pakistani ancestry. Plaintiff was fired from his position as supervisor of facilities maintenance mechanics, according to United Airlines because of an assault on a female employee of an outside service provider. In Nazir v. United Airlines, Inc., (CA Ct. App., Oct. 9, 2009), the court concluded that questions of fact remained as to whether the reasons given for Nazir's firing were a pretext for religious or national origin discrimination. Nazir had cited a long history of ethnic name calling and harassment by co-workers. Today's San Francisco Chronicle reports on the decision.

Presidential Statement, Official Delegation Hail Canonization of Fr. Damien

Pope Benedict XVI today canonized five new saints, including Belgian-born priest, Jozef De Veuster, known as Father Damien, who died of leprosy in 1889 after years of caring for those suffering from leprosy on the Hawaiian island of Molokai. (New York Times.) On Friday, the White House issued a statement from the President recognizing Fr. Damien's canonization. Obama, who was born in Hawaii, recalled hearing stories of Fr. Damien's work. A large delegation from Hawaii attended the canonization ceremony in Rome. ABC News reports that President Obama sent an official delegation to Sunday's ceremony. It was led by US ambassador to the Vatican, Miguel Humberto Diaz, and included Hawaii Sen. Daniel Kahikina Akaka; New Jersey Rep. Donald Payne; the superintendent of Kalaupapa National Historic Park, Stephen Prokop; Bishop of Honolulu Larry Silva; and President of the Catholic Health Association of the United States Sister Carol Ann Keehan.

Ohio Judge Again Enjoined From Displaying Poster Featuring 10 Commandments

In ACLU of Ohio Foundation, Inc. v. DeWeese, (ND OH, Oct. 8, 2009), an Ohio federal district court enjoined Richland County (OH) Common Pleas Judge James DeWeese from continuing to display in his court room a framed poster he had created titled "Philosophies of Law In Conflict." The poster was put up after the judge was enjoined in 2004 from displaying a poster containing the Ten Commandments. The new poster discussed moral absolutism as opposed to moral relativism. In a column titled Moral Absolutes, the poster lists the text of the Ten Commandments next to a column listing "Humanist Precepts." Granting summary judgment to the ACLU, the court concluded that Judge DeWeese's purpose in posting the display was religious, and that a reasonable person would view the poster as a governmental endorsement of religion. The poster violated the Establishment Clause as well as Art. I, Sec. 7 of the Ohio Constitution. The court also concluded that the Free Speech clause of the First Amendment does not protect the display because it is not private speech. The Ohio ACLU issued a press release on the case and Friday's Mansfield (OH) News Journal reported on it. (See prior related posting.)

UPDATE: The Oct. 13 Mansfield News Journal reports that Judge DeWeese has complied with the federal court order by placing a dark blue drape over his display and posting on the drape a statement objecting to censorship which he says was imposed because "the ACLU was offended" by reading his essay.

Friday, October 09, 2009

San Francisco Catholic Archdiocese Battles City Over Transfer Tax Liability

The San Francisco Bay Guardian reports on a hearing yesterday before the city's Transfer Tax Review Board. At issue is somewhere between $3 million and $15 million in transfer taxes that the city says are due from the San Francisco Catholic Archdiocese as a result of its transfer last year of some 233 properties to two new Catholic non-profit holding companies. According to yesterday's SF Appeal, apparently the properties were transferred to shield them from judgments in any future clergy sexual abuse lawsuits. The Archdiocese says the transfers are not subject to tax because, as transfers from one Catholic entity to another, they qualify as "gifts" under canon law. In an earlier statement, the Archdiocese claimed that the law treats these as properties of the Church, and that the transfers between religious corporations are seen as merely conveniences to assist the Church in holding title. Church supporters say that paying these transfer taxes could cripple other Church programs. Some suggest that attempts by San Francisco Assessor-Recorder Phil Ting to impose the tax is retaliation for the Church's support of Proposition 8 (banning gay marriage) last year. [Thanks to PewSitter for the lead.]

NY Appellate Court Refuses To Adjudicate Validity of Hindu Marriage Rites

In Madireddy v. Madireddy, (NY App. Div., Oct. 6, 2009), a New York state appellate court dismissed a divorce complaint because the case required the civil courts to determine whether the parties' were validly married in a Hindu ceremony in India in 1952. The court concluded that determining the validity of the alleged marriage required analysis of "the various and customary rites, customs, and practices of the Hindu religion of a particular caste in a particular region." The trial court was without jurisdiction to settle a religious controversy that could not be resolved by the application of neutral principles of law. [Thanks to Eugene Volokh via Religionlaw for the lead.]

City Will Post "In God We Trust"

The Fortuna, California City Council on Monday voted 5-0 to post the national motto, "In God We Trust", in city council chambers. Members of the public expressed conflicting views on the proposal at the Council meeting. One argued that he should not be forced to recognize God, but another responded that a majority of people in the community believe in God and he was tired of having the minority telling him that he can't recognize his God in public. Yesterday's Humboldt (CA) Beacon reports that one of the Council members will come up with funding for the placard. Some 56 cities have joined a movement to post the motto. Council must still give final approval later this month.

Illinois Cancels Controversial Grant To Historic Church For Rebuilding

Chicago activist Rob Sherman reports that the Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity notified (full text of letter) Pilgrim Baptist Church last month that it was terminating a grant promised to the church by former Governor Rod Blagojevich. The $1 million state grant was intended to help rebuild the historic Chicago church after it was severely damaged by fire in 2006. Last year, Sherman filed a lawsuit alleging that the grant violates the Establishment Clause as well as various provisions of the Illinois Constitution that effectively bar expenditures for religious purposes. (See prior posting.) The grant agreement limited the funds to use for secular purposes, but Sherman claimed that the state portion will still be identified with the church and that there were no effective limits on use of the funds after the two-year grant period.

New Hampshire Noise Law Challenged By Two Evangelists

Two Christian evangelists filed a federal lawsuit on Wednesday challenging the constitutionality of New Hampshire's statute banning loud and unreasonable noise in a public place, and the application of that statute by the Town of Hampton. The complaint (full text) in Frost v. Town of Hampton, (D NH, filed 10/7/2009), alleges that N.H. RSA 644:2(III)(a) is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad, and is used to improperly restrain any speech "that the government subjectively determines does not increase tourism in the Hampton Beach area." The two plaintiffs were arrested in August and charged with disorderly conduct after preaching near the beach boardwalk where a rock concert was being held. Those charges were dismissed. The lawsuit also claims false arrest in connection with that incident. Alliance Defense Fund issued a release announcing the lawsuit.

NY Finds That Restaurant Discriminated Against Falun Gong Patrons

Epoch Times reports on an Oct. 2 ruling by the New York State Division on Human Rights finding that the Lucky Joy restaurant in Flushing violated anti-discrimination laws when it refused service to two women and a young girl because one of them was wearing a Falun Gong T-shirt. (See prior posting.) Each of the three was awarded $7000 in damages. In addition the restaurant must display an anti-discrimination poster and create anti-discrimination training and procedures.

Catholic Archbishop Speaks Out On Government's Relationship With Catholics

CNA reports on an interesting speech delivered by Catholic Archbishop of Denver Charles J. Chaput yesterday at North Carolina's Belmont Abbey College where he was given the Envoy of the Year Award. He praised Belmont Abbey for its stand against the EEOC which has charged the college with gender discrimination for dropping coverage for contraceptive drugs from its health plan for employees. (See prior posting.) Contrasting anti-Catholic bigotry in early America with today, Chaput said:

Caesar wears a different suit. He has great media handlers. He bullies religion while he claims to respect it. He talks piously about the law and equality and tolerance and fairness. But he still confuses himself with God –and he still violates the rights of Catholic believers and institutions by intruding himself where he has no right to be....

It's one of the great ironies of the moment that tiny Belmont Abbey would have the courage to challenge Caesar over its right to be faithfully Catholic in its policies, while so many other American Catholics seem eager to give Caesar honors.

Earlier this week, Chaput published an article in the Italian newspaper Il Foglio criticizing Notre Dame University's award of an honorary degree to President Obama last Spring.

Hate Crimes Bill Included In Defense Authorization Conference Report Passed By House

It appears that the long battle to expand federal hate crimes legislation is about to succeed. (See prior posting.) The Conference Report on HR 2647, the 2010 Department of Defense Authorization Bill, included in the bill the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crime Prevention Act. Yesterday the House of Representatives approved the Conference Report by a vote of 281-146. The Conference Report now goes to the Senate for its approval. President Obama has promised to sign the legislation.

According to a release from the Senate Armed Services Committee, the hate crime provisions will (1) prohibit hate crimes based on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any person; (2) provide support for the criminal investigation and prosecution of hate crimes by State, local, and tribal law enforcement officials; and (3) prohibit attacks on United States service members based on their military service.

Yesterday's Los Angeles Times reports that 131 of the 146 "No" votes were from Republicans who object to the hate crimes legislation, despite language designed to protect religious speech and association. Conservative Christians have argued that the bill could be used to prosecute pastors for anti-gay sermons that are later connected to violence against gays. Here are the provisions in the Conference Report intended to deal with this issue (at pp. 1366-69):

SEC. 4710. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.
For purposes of construing this division and the amendments made by this division the following shall apply:

(1) IN GENERAL.—Nothing in this division shall be construed to allow a court, in any criminal trial for an offense described under this division or an amendment made by this division, in the absence of a stipulation by the parties, to admit evidence of speech, beliefs, association, group membership, or expressive conduct unless that evidence is relevant and admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence. Nothing in this division is intended to affect the existing rules of evidence.

(2) VIOLENT ACTS.—This division applies to violent acts motivated by actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of a victim.

(3) CONSTRUCTION AND APPLICATION.—Nothing in this division, or an amendment made by this division, shall be construed or applied in a manner that infringes any rights under the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Nor shall anything in this division, or an amendment made by this division, be construed or applied in a manner that substantially burdens a person’s exercise of religion (regardless of whether compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief), speech, expression, or association, unless the Government demonstrates that application of the burden to the person is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest and is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest, if such exercise of religion, speech, expression, or association was not intended to—
(A) plan or prepare for an act of physical violence; or
(B) incite an imminent act of physical violence against another.

(4) FREE EXPRESSION.—Nothing in this division shall be construed to allow prosecution based solely upon an individual’s expression of racial, religious, political, or other beliefs or solely upon an individual’s membership in a group advocating or espousing such beliefs.

(5) FIRST AMENDMENT.—Nothing in this division, or an amendment made by this division, shall be construed to diminish any rights under the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

(6) CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS.—Nothing in this division shall be construed to prohibit any constitutionally protected speech, expressive conduct or activities (regardless of whether compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief), including the exercise of religion protected by the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States and peaceful picketing or demonstration. The Constitution of the United States does not protect speech, conduct or activities consisting of planning for, conspiring to commit, or committing an act of violence.

SEC. 4711. GUIDELINES FOR HATE-CRIMES OFFENSES.
Section 249(a) of title 18, United States Code, as added by section 4707 of this Act, is amended by adding at the end the following:

"(4) GUIDELINES.—All prosecutions conducted by the United States under this section shall be undertaken pursuant to guidelines issued by the Attorney General, or the designee of the Attorney General, to be included in the United States Attorneys’ Manual that shall establish neutral and objective criteria for determining whether a crime was committed because of the actual or perceived status of any person."

ADL issued a press release welcoming the House action and said the next step is training for law enforcement personnel and prosecutors about the new law. The Family Research Council issued a statement criticizing the legislation, calling it a "thought-crimes bill" and charging that it gives special rights based solely on sexual behavior.