Iranian Cleric Says Nuclear Weapons Violate Islamic Law

Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center reported this week that a senior cleric in Iran, Ayatollah Hossein-Ali Montazeri, has issued a fatwa stating that developing and using nuclear weapons are a violation of Muslim religious law. His ruling said that the use of nuclear weapons would lead to the deaths of innocent people and harm future generations. The report says that in the past, other Iranian clerics have issued competing rulings on the issue. In the past, senior Iranian figures have claimed that Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei issued a fatwa (never made public) prohibiting the development of nuclear weapons.

B.C. Will Seek Supreme Court Clarification on Constitutionality of Polygamy Law

In Canada, British Columbia's Attorney General has decided that instead of appealing the dismissal of polygamy charges that were filed against the leaders of two FLDS factions, (see prior posting) the province will instead ask the British Columbia Supreme Court for clarification on the law. CBC News reported yesterday that the Attorney General will ask the Supreme Court to rule on whether the province's anti-polygamy law is consistent with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and to clarify the meaning of the provisions of Section 293 of the Criminal Code. In a press release, the Attorney General said: "Until Canadians and the justice system have clarity about the constitutionality of our polygamy laws, all provinces, including ours, face a lengthy and costly legal process in prosecuting alleged offences." The Province has published a helpful timeline of developments in the long-running case.

9th Circuit Issues Opinion on Release of Names of Referendum Petition Signers

The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has now released its opinion in John Doe #1 v. Reed, (9th Cir., Oct. 22, 2009), explaining its order issued last week clearing the way for release of the names of those who signed referendum petitions in Washington state seeking review of the state's domestic partnership law. (See prior posting.) The court held that applying Washington state's Public Records Law to the referendum petitions does not violate the 1st Amendment right to anonymous political speech. It said that the signatures on the petitions are not anonymous. It concluded further that the district court was incorrect in applying strict scrutiny, saying that petition signing should be seen as "expressive conduct" subject to intermediate scrutiny. The state's asserted interests in preserving the integrity of the election and furnishing voters information about who supported placing a referendum on the ballot were found to be sufficiently important to justify their incidental limitation on speech. The incidental effect was found no greater than necessary to carry out the state's goals. [Thanks to Eugene Volokh for the lead.]

Senate Gives Final Approval To Hate Crimes Bill

The U.S. Senate yesterday by a largely party-line vote of 68-29 approved HR 2647, the 2010 National Defense Authorization Act as recommended by the Conference Committee. The bill contains an expansion of federal hate crimes legislation, the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crime Prevention Act. The House has already approved the Conference Committee version (see prior posting) and the bill now goes to President Obama who is expected to sign it. The Washington Post reports that Republicans who opposed the hate crimes provisions were upset that the Democrats attached them to a defense spending bill, daring them to vote against the military budget.

9th Circuit Denies En Banc Review Of Arizona Tuition Contribution Tax Credits

In Winn v. Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization, (9th Cir., Oct. 20, 2009), the full U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to grant en banc review in a case challenging Arizona's program of tax credits to provide scholarships, mostly for students in religious schools. In the case, a 3-judge panel ruled that, as applied, Arizona's tax credit of up to $500 to individuals who contribute funds to nonprofit "school tuition organizations" violates the Establishment Clause. (See prior posting.)

The denial of en banc review however produced 40-pages of opinions. Eight judges joined in Judge O'Scannlain's 23-page dissent. He wrote in part:

I dissent not only because Winn cannot be squared with the Supreme Court’s mandate in Zelman, but also because the panel’s holding casts a pall over comparable educational tax credit schemes in states across the nation and could derail legislative efforts in four states within our circuit to create similar programs. In short, the panel’s conclusion invalidates an increasingly popular method for providing school choice, jeopardizing the educational opportunities of hundreds of thousands of children nationwide.....

I am at a loss to understand how a reasonable observer—one fully informed about all matters related to the program—could conclude that the "government itself" has endorsed religion in this case. Multiple layers of private, individual choice separate the state from any religious entanglement: the "government itself" is at least four times removed from any aid to religious organizations.....

Responding with their own 17-page opinion, the three judges on the original panel (with a fourth indicating agreement) argued that "the program alleged here neither makes scholarships available to parents on a religiously neutral basis nor gives them a true private choice as to where to utilize the scholarships." Giving to taxpayers the choice of allocating their contributions to religious schools was not enough to break the circuit between government and religion. AP reports on the decision. [Thanks to Bob Ritter for the lead.]

UPDATE: The Institute for Justice Arizona Chapter which supports the tax credits and represents several clients in the case says it will seek Supreme Court review of the 9th Circuit's decision. The Arizona Attorney General's office has not yet decided whether it too will appeal to the Supreme Court. (Arizona Republic, Oct. 22).

Louisiana Catholic Archdiocese Settles 20 Abuse Lawsuits

Yesterday's Lafayette (LA) Daily Advertiser reports that the Catholic Archdiocese of New Orleans has settled twenty lawsuits alleging sexual and physical mistreatment of children some 40 to 50 years ago at Catholic homes for troubled boys. The settlement totalling $5.182 million was reached only after years of mediation and negotiation.

Hungary's President Wants Religion Questions On 2011 Census

Hungary's President Laszlo Solyom has refused to sign a bill passed by Parliament to govern Hungary's scheduled 2011 census. According to MTI today, the President sent the bill back to lawmakers to eliminate the the ban on asking census questions regarding health status or religion. The 2001 census included questions on these issues. Solyom says the information is important and that the census should be consistent to facilitate comparisons.

Pennsylvania School Will Temporarily End Enforcement of Speech Code

Yesterday a Pennsylvania federal district court issued an Agreed Temporary Consent Order in E.B. v. West Shore School District, (MD PA, filed 10/5/2009). The case grew out of an incident in which a Lewisberry, Pennsylvania middle school student was told by school officials to remove his T-shirt which carried the message "Abortion is Not Health Care". He wore the shirt to school on the day President Obama was delivering a national address to school students. The student's father sued on his son's behalf alleging in the complaint (full text) that the school's Student Expression Policy violates the 1st and 14th Amendments as well as Pennsylvania's Religious Freedom Protection Act. The complaint alleges in part that the Policy prevents his son "from incorporating his private religious expression into his clothing based solely on the religious and political nature of his expression." (ADF press release.)

Under the consent order issued yesterday (which remains in effect until Jan. 15), in exchange for plaintiffs not seeking a preliminary injunction, the school agreed not to enforce certain provisions in its Expression Policy. It will not bar expression on the ground that it "seek[s] to establish the supremacy of a particular religious denomination, sect, or point of view," nor will it enforce the ban against expression that might be "otherwise deemed harmful to impressionable students." The school will also not enforce the portion of its Dress and Grooming Policy that bans "clothing which creates a hostile educational environment or evidences discriminatory bias or animus." An Alliance Defense Fund release reported on the temporary order.

Santeria Priest Who Won Legal Victory Is Profiled

Yesterday's Dallas Observer carries a long background piece on Jose Merced, the Santeria priest who recently won a 5th Circuit victory allowing him to continue animal sacrifices at his Euless, Texas home, despite the city's health and safety concerns. (See prior posting.) Here is a short excerpt:

The litigation had taken its toll on Merced. His testimony and the media attention that followed brought many of Santería's secrets into the open and unnerved those devotees who saw its mystery as part of its theology as well as its enchantment.

He had written letters to the several hundred Santeros he had met over the years, asking each to contribute $100 to his legal defense fund. But many turned him down. Some were fearful that his case would reveal the secrets that gave power and meaning to their religion; others felt his case was his own personal crusade and not a cause for all who practice Santería. "They want to keep on hiding," Merced says, "which I don't understand."

Last night, for the first time in over three years, Merced was to resume his sacrifices of four-legged animals in a ceremony designed to heal the severe back pain, depression and loneliness of a follower. She would be initiated into the priesthood through the sacrifice of animals which, according to Santeria belief, must die so she can live a healthy and spiritual life. Meanwhile the Euless city attorney is exploring whether there are other routes available to end Merced's practices.

Canadian Court Dismisses Graduate Student's Religious Discrimination Claim

In Maughan v. University of British Columbia, (BC Ct. App., Oct. 20, 2009), the Brisish Columbia Court of Appeal agreed with the trial court that a graduate student at UBC had not shown that tensions between her and her English professor resulted from religious discrimination. Cynthia Maughan, an Anglican student in her mid-40's, pursuing an M.A. in English, received a low grade in Dr. Wier's seminar on "The Proper: From Derrida to Delgamuukw." Her primary complaint revolved around an incident in the seminar when she argued a passage from a Derrida text comparing the Holy Eucharist to "mystical cannibalism" was a misinterpretation of the Bible. Other students strongly defended Derrida, and Maughan described those exchages as "shocking" and the passage as "intense sacrilege." The Court of Appeal, dismissing her claims for negligence and breach of British Columbia's Civil Rights Protection Act, concluded: "In our view, Ms. Maughan’s claim is not based on the evidence per se, but on her interpretation of the evidence and the inferences she drew from the evidence founded on her firm conviction that she was subjected to discriminatory treatment by the respondents on the basis of her religion." Xtra West reported on the decision yesterday.

Settlement Reached In Suit Over Grooming Rules For Federal Building Guards

The Fresno Bee and the Sikh Coalition this week reported on the settlement of a lawsuit over the Department of Homeland Security's grooming rules for security officers hired under contract to guard federal buildings. Raghbir Singh, a Sikh who wore a turban and beard, was hired through a private security firm in 2005 to guard an IRS building. However he was forced off the job after he refused to comply with regulations of the Federal Protective Service that required security guards to be clean-shaven and wear a uniform and hat. After a lawsuit was filed in 2007, the FPS informally agreed to make religious accommodations in its grooming and headgear policy. In this week's settlement of the case, the federal government paid Singh $50,000 in damages for wrongful termination and the FPS has changed its grooming rules.

European Court Says Italian Catholic Unversity Infringed Faculty Applicant's Rights

Lombardi Vallauri v. Italy, (ECHR, Oct. 20, 2009) [full text in French, Word.doc], decided yesterday by the European Court of Human Rights, held that the rights of a Lecturer at Milan's Catholic University of the Sacred Heart were infringed by procedural irregularities in refusing to consider his application for a permanent faculty position. As explained by the Court's press release on the case, Luigi Lombardi Vallauri had taught on the Faculty of Law under temporary contracts for over 20 years. When competition for permanent appointment to the post opened, the University's Faculty Board refused to consider his application because the Congregation for Catholic Education, an institution of the Holy See, informed the President of the University that some of Vallauri's views were "in clear opposition to Catholic doctrine." Approval by the Congregation for Catholic Education was one of the conditions for being considered for the position. The Court concluded, that while Italian courts could not review the substance of the decision, the Faculty Board should have explained how Vallauri's views were liable to affect the University's interests. Failure to do so infringed the procedural aspects of the protection of free expression under Art. 10 of the ECHR, as well as his right under Art.6(1) to effective access to a court. One judge dissented. [Thanks to Dott. Pasquale Annicchino for the lead.]

Atheist Ads Will Appear In New York Subway Stations

A coalition of eight groups calling themselves the Big Apple Coalition of Reason have purchased space for posters in a dozen New York subway stations. CNN reports that beginning Monday, posters raising awareness of those who do not believe in God will be displayed. The ads will read: "A million New Yorkers are good without God. Are you?" The goal of the campaign is to reach out to those who have similar views. Funded by a $25,000 anonymous donation, this is part of a broader national campaign. New York's Metro Transit Authority says that its advertising guidelines respect freedom of speech and religion.

Alito Complains About Questions Over Catholic High Court Majority

AP reports on a speech given Tuesday by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito to Philadelphia's Justinian Society, a group Italian-American lawyers, judges and law students. According to the report, Alito expressed frustration over persistent questions about the court's 6-Justice Roman Catholic majority. He complained: "This is one of those questions that does not die."

Vietnam Recognizes Assemblies of God Church

Earth Times reports that in a ceremony in Vietnam's Ho Chi Minh City on Monday, the government's Committee for Religious Affairs granted formal recognition under the 2007 Law on Religion to the Vietnamese branch of the Assemblies of God church. The church, the world's largest Pentecostal Christian denomination, has 40,000 members in Vietnam. It has been active in the country since 1989, and had received warnings from the government. However sanctions were never imposed because of ambiguities in the law. Apparently it will take another year for the church's status to become fully legal.

UPDATE: Christian News Today provides more legal details. The recognition process was delayed until now because Vietnam's Religion Law requires 20 years of stable organization before the process can begin. Now it has received an "operating license" which allows it to carry on religious activities in the country for the next year. During that time it must prepare a doctrinal statement, a constitution and bylaws and a four-year working plan. If these are approved by the government, then the Church can hold an organizing assembly.

Congress Passes Extension of Special Immigrant Nonminister Religious Worker Program

Following House passage last week, the U.S. Senate yesterday passed and sent on to the President the Conference Committee's version of H.R. 2892, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act. Section 568(a) of the bill extends until Sept. 30, 2012 the Special Immigrant Nonminister Religious Worker Program. (See prior posting.) Under prior law that program expired three weeks ago. The bill also requires Citizenship and Immigration Services to submit a report to Congress on the risks of fraud and non-compliance by program participants, and a plan to improve the integrity of the program. In June 2009, the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General issued a report (full text) on steps taken recently to reduce fraud in the program.

6th Circuit Hears Oral Arguments In Long-Running 10 Commandments Case

The 6th Circuit yesterday heard oral arguments in the long running 10-Commandments case, ACLU of Kentucky v. McCreary County. In 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a preliminary injunction barring the a display of the Ten Commandments along with other historical documents that refer to God in two Kentucky county courthouses. A majority concluded that the displays violated the Establishment Clause because the predominant purpose of the displays was the advancement of religion. (See prior posting.) However Justice Souter added: "we do not decide that the Counties' past actions forever taint any effort on their part to deal with the subject matter." Meanwhile the counties put up yet a third display, a broader "Foundations of American Law and Government" display that included the Ten Commandments along with other historical documents. On that basis, on remand the district court refused to issue a permanent injunction, but also refused to find that the counties had purged themselves of their original religious motivation. (See prior posting.) The Cincinnati Enquirer says that yesterday's oral arguments in the 6th Circuit focused on whether the counties have done enough to eliminate their original religious motivation.

Tentative Settlement Reached in "Flying Imams" Case

Fox News reported yesterday that a tentative settlement has been reached by all parties in the so-called "flying imams" case. The lawsuit, filed by six Muslim clergy against US Airways and the Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Airport Commission, alleged false arrest, unreasonable search and seizure and equal protection violations. The six plaintiffs were removed from a U.S. Airways flight in 2006 as they were returning from the North American Imams Federation conference held in Minneapolis. (See prior posting.) Details still need to be worked out in the settlement agreed to by the parties on Monday, and federal court approval is still required. None of the parties would comment on specifics of the settlement.

Vatican Invites Conservative Anglicans Into New Affiliation

Surprise developments today out of Rome, London and Washington create new possibilities for dissident Episcopal congregations that are increasingly splitting off from ECUSA and affiliating with new more conservative Anglican provinces. (See prior related posting.) The Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith announced:

[T]he Catholic Church is responding to the many requests that have been submitted to the Holy See from groups of Anglican clergy and faithful in different parts of the world who wish to enter into full visible communion.... [T]he Holy Father has introduced a canonical structure that provides for such corporate reunion by establishing Personal Ordinariates, which will allow former Anglicans to enter full communion with the Catholic Church while preserving elements of the distinctive Anglican spiritual and liturgical patrimony. Under the terms of the Apostolic Constitution, pastoral oversight and guidance will be provided for groups of former Anglicans through a Personal Ordinariate, whose Ordinary will usually be appointed from among former Anglican clergy.

Bloomberg News characterizes the new initiative as a way "to integrate disaffected Anglicans and enable the faith's married priests to become Roman Catholic clerics." In London, Roman Catholic Archbishop Vincent Nichols of Westminster and Anglican Archbishop Rowan Williams issued a joint statement saying that today's announcement from the Vatican "brings to an end a period of uncertainty for such groups who have nurtured hopes of new ways of embracing unity with the Catholic Church." However, writing in the London Telegraph, Jonathan Wynne-Jones says this about the developments:

Interestingly, the archbishop says that "this new possibility is in no sense at all intended to undermine existing relations between our two communions or to be an act of proselytism or aggressions". He is either putting on a brave face for the sake of Anglican pride, being incredibly naive or had this part dictated to him by somebody in Rome. For there is no way that this won't undermine the archbishop’s position and weaken the Church of England.

Meanwhile in the United States, the head of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops quickly issued a statement from Washington saying in part:

Today the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has received word of the new Provision in the form of an apostolic constitution issued by the Holy See for the reception into full communion with the Catholic Church of groups from the Anglican tradition. The USCCB stands ready to collaborate in the implementation of that Provision in our country.

The New York Times reports on today's news conference held in the Vatican by Cardinal William Levada, the prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith:

Asked at the Vatican news conference what would happen if an Anglican congregation led by a woman priest wanted to join the Catholic Church, Cardinal Levada smiled and said, “I would be surprised” if that happened.

Justice Kennedy Reinstates Injunction Against Release of Petition Signers' Names

Yesterday, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy issued an order (full text) reinstating the preliminary injunction issued by a federal district court in Washington state in John Doe #1 v. Ried. The injunction bars release of the names of signers of referendum petitions seeking to overturn a recently-enacted state domestic partnership law. The 9th Circuit last week reversed the district court (see prior posting), and plaintiffs seeking to prevent release of the names immediately petitioned Justice Kennedy. The full text of both appellants' application to Kennedy and the response by Washington's Secretary of State are available online. AP reports on the case, and Eugene Volokh weighs in on the latest developments.

UPDATE: On Tuesday, the full Supreme Court (Justice Stevens dissenting) confirmed Justice Kennedy's reinstatement of the district court's preliminary injunction, "pending the timely filing and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari." (Full text of order.) [Thanks to Eugene Volokh for the lead.]