Student Prayer Club Satisfies All Sides On Church-State Issues

Georgetown, South Carolina school officials have found a way to allow students to open their school day with prayer, yet satisfy church-state concerns of groups such as Americans United (AU statement) which complained about Georgetown High School's long-standing practice of permitting a local resident to hand out Bible verses and lead students in prayer in the morning before school. School officials told resident Violet Infinger that she could no longer hand out religious literature inside the school. (UPI, 2/9.) At the same time, however, the school helped students form a Prayer Club in a manner that complies with the federal Equal Access Act. The Club will be student-led, and will meet each morning on school grounds for 13 minutes before school begins. Students can invite ministers and lay people to attend the Club's prayer sessions so long as the invitees meet school requirements for volunteers. (WBTW 13 News).

Evangelist Challenges Ban On Leafleting Near California Courthouse

A federal lawsuit was filed in Los Angeles on Monday by a Christian evangelist challenging the breadth of a rule banning the distribution of leaflets and educational or counseling activities within 100 feet of any courthouse door. The complaint (full text) in Miano v. McCoy, (CD CA, filed 2/8/2010), alleges that the rule, imposed by an administrative general order from the court, has been interpreted by San Fernando Courthouse officials to include a ban on activities within 100 feet of two unused emergency exits. This results in evangelist Anthony Miano being unable to approach individuals to discuss religion or hand them a leaflet anywhere on the entire sidewalk closest to the courthouse. The lawsuit asks for a declaratory judgment and injunction finding that the ban violates the free expression, due process and equal protection clauses of the U.S. Constitution. It also seeks nominal damages, costs and attorneys' fees. Alliance Defense Fund issued a release announcing the filing of the case.

State Bills To Ban Implanted RFIDs Moving Ahead Partly Out of Biblical Concerns

Virginia's House of Delegates yesterday passed by a vote of 88-9 with 1 abstention House Bill No. 53 banning insurers or employers from requiring implantation of microchips into a person's body. According to yesterday's Washington Post, while privacy issues are the main concern, the bill's sponsor Del. Mark L.Cole says he also shares the concern that implanted radio frequency identification tags might be the "mark of the beast" that is described in the Biblical Book of Revelation. He explained: "My understanding -- I'm not a theologian -- but there's a prophecy in the Bible that says you'll have to receive a mark, or you can neither buy nor sell things in end times. Some people think these computer chips might be that mark." Nashville Scene yesterday reported that a similar bill (HB0791) has been introduced into the Tennessee legislature. At a hearing on the bill, critics of the bill suggested that implanted RFIDs might be useful to track Alzheimer's patients or sex offenders.

British Court Vindicate's Hindu Man's Right To Cremation on Funeral Pyre

In The Queen on the Appliation of Ghai v. Newcastle City Council, (Eng. & Wales Ct. App., Feb. 10, 2010), Britain's Court of Appeal upheld the right of a Hindu man to be cremated in England on a traditional funeral pyre according to his religious beliefs. The court interpreted the requirement in the Cremation Act 1902 and regulations under it that all cremations take place in crematoria as being broad enough to include funeral pyres surrounded by traditional Indian structures. According to The Hindu today, 71-year old Davendra Ghai, founder of the Anglo-Asian Friendship Society who brought the case, welcomed the Appeals Court’s decision. He said: "Now if I go tomorrow I will go peacefully, because I know that I will have a good send-off. Everyone should live and die according to their own religion." (See prior related posting.)

Anti-Semitic Statements By Juror Should Have Led To Hearing On New Trial Motion

In Fleshner v. Pepose Vision Institute, P.C., (MO Sup. Ct., Feb. 9, 2010), the Missouri Supreme Court held that the trial court in a wrongful termination case should have held a hearing on juror misconduct where it was alleged that a juror made anti-Semitic remarks about one of the witnesses during jury deliberations. The court held: "If the trial court finds after conducting a hearing that such biased or prejudicial statements were made during deliberations, then the motion for a new trial should be granted as the parties would have been deprived of their right to a trial by 12 fair and impartial jurors."

Catholic Church Now Faces Old Sex Abuse Charges In Germany

The New York Times reported yesterday that the Catholic Church is facing yet another child sex abuse scandal-- this time in Germany. It began last month with charges of abuse in the 1970's and '80's by 3 priests at Berlin's elite Canisius High School. In a 6-part series Der Spiegel now charges that 94 priests and and lay persons are suspected of abusing some 150 children and teenagers since 1995. The statute of limitations for prosecutions have run on most of these incidents. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Morocco Deports US Missionary For Proselytizing Among Muslims

Yesterday's Christian Post reports that in Morocco some 60 security force officers raided a Christian Bible study session in a town south of Marrakech last week. Eighteen Moroccans (including five children) were temporarily taken into custody and an American missionary was deported. The Interior Ministry said that the missionary was attempting to "spread evangelist creed in the Kingdom and locate new Moroccan nationals for recruitment." Article 220 of the Moroccan Penal Code prohibits attempting to induce Muslims to convert to another religion.

D.C. Election Board Rejects Referendum on Same-Sex Marriage Law; Appeal Filed

In In re Referendum on the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Equality Amendment Act of 2009, (DCBOEE, Feb. 4, 2010), the District of Columbia Board of Elections and Ethics rejected an attempt to hold a referendum on recently passed DC legislation authorizing same-sex marriage. The D.C. Initiative, Referendum and Recall Procedures Act requires the Board to refuse to accept referendum measures that would would frustrate efforts to eradicate discrimination prohibited by the D.C. Human Rights Act. The D.C. Superior Court has recently, using the same rationale, rejected an initiative petition to define marriage as being only between a man and a woman. (See prior posting.)

Yesterday, Alliance Defense Fund and Stand4Marriage DC filed a petition in D.C. Superior Court for review of the Board's decision rejecting the referendum. (Press release.) The petition (full text) argues that the referendum does not have the effect of authorizing discrimination on the basis of sex or sexual orientation since the D.C. legislation does not make sexual orientation a determinative factor in authorizing issuance of marriage licenses.

Court Dismisses Religious and National Origin Discrimination Claim Against College

In Shakir v. Board of Trustees of Rend Lake College, (SD IL, Feb. 8, 2010), and Illinois federal district court granted summary judgment to defendants in a case in which plaintiff, the former vice president of student services at Rend Lake College, charged religious and national origin discrimination. Plaintiff Salah Shakir charged that the true reason the College investigated him, froze his salary and transferred him to a different position stemmed from discriminatory attitudes toward his Muslim religion and his Iraqi nationality. He also claimed that he was not chosen as College president in retaliation for his filing an EEOC complaint. The court concluded that plaintiff failed to prove discriminatory intent on the part of defendants. Yesterday's Mt. Vernon (IL) Register-News reported on the decision.

8th Circuit Denies Qualified Immunity To Officials Who Conspired Against Faith-Based School

In Heartland Academy Community Church v. Waddle, (8th Cir., Feb. 8, 2010), the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of appeals refused to dismiss on qualified immunity grounds a civil rights action for damages against various Missouri officials who conspired in 2001 to remove 115 students from a Christian faith-based boarding school for children with behavioral and substance abuse problems. The court described the underlying charges:

Two of the conspiracy’s more prominent members were Chief Juvenile Officers Michael Waddle (Waddle) and Cindy Ayers (Ayers).Waddle, the conspiracy’s ringleader, disliked HCA because (1) HCA was unlicensed (legally), (2) Waddle disagreed with HACC’s teachings, and (3) Waddle believed HCA had not acted "very Christ-like." Ayers complained HCA was "growing too fast," and expressed the view that "there [were] people everywhere at [HCA], including children from foreign countries," and Missouri should slow or "put a stop" to HCA.

The charged conspiracy reached its nadir on October 30, 2001, when juvenile authorities and armed law enforcement officers, 30 total, arrived at HCA’s campus
and removed 115 of its students. The Officials did not provide any notice to Heartland of the removal until the last possible moment. Waddle and Ayers procured ex parte orders from local juvenile court judges to remove HCA’s students. Waddle
and Ayers used false misrepresentations to obtain the ex parte removal orders. The juvenile court judges issued the ex parte orders under the false impressions (1) all HCA students were in imminent danger of physical harm, (2) HCA was unwilling to
cooperate with the relevant juvenile authorities, and (3) no lesser alternative short of a mass removal was available to ensure the students’ safety.

The court rejected defendants' claim that the trial court failed to look at each official's conduct individually when ruling on qualified immunity.

Court Orders Cemetery Title Transferred To Allow O'Hare Airport Expansion

Yesterday's Chicago Tribune reports that an Illinois court has cleared the way for expansion of Chicago's O'Hare Airport by ordering the transfer of title of the 5.3-acre St. Johannes Cemetery from St. John's United Church of Christ to the city for $630,000. This follows a ruling last December that the city could use eminent domain to acquire the land. In previous litigation, church members were unsuccessful in arguing that moving the graves would illegally impose a substantial burden on their religious exercise because of their religious belief in the physical resurrection of the bodies of Christian believers. The city will work with next of kin to have the graves moved by spring of 2011. The court ordered no graves to be moved for at least 20 days to give church attorneys a chance to appeal yesterday's decision.

Human Rights Activists Charge Egypt Plans To Monitor Sermons In Mosques Through Cameras

Egypt's Ministry of Islamic Endowments has denied that it plans to monitor sermons given in mosques through the use of cameras. Media Line yesterday reported that concern over monitoring arose after cameras were installed in the Sayyida Nafisa Mosque in Cairo. Ministry spokesmen however said the cameras were to prevent stealing money from charity boxes. Human rights advocates are suspicious of the true motivations, saying the cameras violate protections in Egypt's constitution. The decision to set up cameras is apparently related to a recent speech by Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak following the murder of six Copts last month.

Costa Rica's Constitutional Court Rejects Bishops Power To Select Religion Teachers

CNA yesterday reported that Costa Rica's Constitutional Court, by a vote of 4-3, struck down the agreement between the Catholic Church and the government that gives the Bishop's Conference of Costa Rica the right to approve teachers of Catholic religion in public schools. The arrangement, which allowed the Church to reject a teacher on moral grounds as well as knowledge of religion, was seen by those challenging it as an intrusion by bishops into affairs of the public schools.

ACLU Say College Prof Teaches Religion and Anti-LGBT Views As Fact

The ACLU of Northern California yesterday sent a demand letter (full text) to the president of Fresno City College complaining about a faculty member, Dr. Bradley Lopez, who teaches a health science class in which he presents religiously-based and anti-LGBT views as scientific fact. Yesterday's Fresno Bee and a press release from the ACLU describe aspects of Lopez's class. Lopez presented a slide describing homosexuality as a "biological misapplication of human sexuality" and said that the "recommended treatment" is "psychological counseling" or "hormone supplements." Lopez presented Biblical passages as "empirical" evidence that life begins at conception, and he asserted that the leading cause of death in the U.S. is abortion. Using a Biblical quote about the world ending in fire, Lopez said "that is the real global warming we should be worried about." Lopez assigned a homework question that involved constructing Jesus genetic makeup from Biblical references. The ACLU insists the College must make certain that its instruction does not inculcate religious doctrines and must give accurate and unbiased health science instruction.

White House Faith Based Council Posts Votes On Two Controversial Church-State Issues [UPDATED]

Last Thursday, the White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships posted the preliminary votes by its Advisory Council on two contentious issues. The final votes were posted today. [The following has been updated to reflect the final vote.]

The first issue is whether faith-based social service providers should be allowed to provide services in rooms that contain religious symbols, artwork or messages. Two members voted to ban any religious symbols. Seven members voted to allow symbols when there is no space in the organization's offices without them and when removing or covering them would be infeasible, so long as objecting clients also have a choice of a different provider to which they do not object. Sixteen members voted not to require removal or covering of symbols, but to encourage providers to be sensitive and to attempt to accommodate those who object, and have alternative providers available if that is not sufficient.

The second issue is whether the government should require houses of worship to form separate corporations to receive direct federal social service funds. Thirteen voted yes; 12 voted no. (See prior related posting.)

Indian Court Strikes Down Quotas for Backward Classes of Muslims

In India, by a vote of 5-2 the High Court of Andhra Pradesh has held that the Andhra Pradesh Reservation in Favor of socially and Educational Backward Classes of Muslims Act 2007 is unconstitutional. According to New Delhi's The Pioneer today, the court also struck down two government orders under the law that had granted a 4% reservation to fifteen backward classes of Muslims in educational institutions and in jobs. The court held that the 2007 report of the Backward Classes Commission on which the law was based did not reflect true conditions. The ruling threw into doubt the fate of thousand of college and professional school students who have been permitted under the 4% quota since 2007. This is the third time since 2004 that the courts have struck down attempts by Andhra Pradesh to create set-asides for Muslims. the Hindu BJP argues there is no provision in the constitution for religion-based set-asides. The state will quickly file an appeal of today's decision with the Supreme Court.

Meanwhile according to today's Business Standard, the government of West Bengal announced a 10% set-aside of government jobs for Muslims there who are economically, socially and educationally backward.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Carissima Mathen, What Religious Freedom Jurisprudence Reveals About Equality, (Journal of Law and Equality, Vol. 6, No. 2, 2009).
• Dov Fox, Taking Sides on Genetic Modification, (American Journal of Bioethics - Neuroscience, Forthcoming).
• Alexander Tallchief Skibine, Culture Talk or Culture War in Federal Indian Law?, (Tulsa Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Susan J. Stabile, An Effort to Articulate a Catholic Realist Approach to Abortion, (U of St. Thomas Legal Studies Research Paper No. 10-08, 2010).
• Mary Jean Dolan, Government Identity Messages and Religion: The Endorsement Test after Summum, (February 5, 2010).
• Robert K. Vischer, When is a Catholic Doing Legal Theory Doing "Catholic Legal Theory?", (Seton Hall Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Elizabeth Rose Schiltz, The Paradox of the Global and the Local in the Financial Crisis of 2008: Applying the Lessons of Caritas in Veritate to the Regulation of Consumer Credit in the United States and the European Union, (Journal of Law and Religion, Vol. 26, 2010).
• Andrew M.M. Koppelman, No Respect: Brian Leiter on Religion, (Northwestern Public Law Research Paper No. 10-07, Jan. 5, 2010).

From SmartCILP:

• Bruce Ledewitz, Could Government Speech Endorsing a Higher Law Resolve the Establishment Clause Crisis?, 41 St. Mary's Law Journal 41-117 (2009).

Activist Charges Conflicts In Some Illinois Capital Funding For Religious Groups

There are new developments in the campaign by Chicago activist Rob Sherman to challenge state legislative appropriations to houses of worship, parochial schools and religious institutions in last year's Capital Bill. (See prior posting.) Last month he filed a challenge with the State Government Suggestion Award Board. In a posting on Friday, Sherman charges that some of the challenged appropriations are to religious organizations on whose boards legislators themselves sit. In one case, a legislator is the CEO of the religious organization slated to receive funds. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Newingham v. Magness, (8th Cir., Feb. 4, 2010), the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals held that Muslim prisoner could proceed with his claim under RLUIPA for injunctive relief to obtain use of a prayer rug, but the court dismissed his claim for damages.

In Green v. Tudor, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7414 (WD MI, Jan. 29, 2010), a Michigan federal district court accepted a magistrate's recommendations (2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124246, Oct. 21, 2009) and dismissed various claims by an inmate over the lack of hot Ramadan meals and lack of notice of substitutions of items in Ramadan meals.

Rupe v. Cate, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7817 (ED CA, Feb. 1, 2010), was a challenge to alleged discrimination and repression by prison officials of prisoner's attempts to practice their Druid and other Pagan religions. While dismissing a number of plaintiff's claims, the court allowed him to proceed on his claim under the free exercise clause, his claim for retaliation and his equal protection claim.

In Cobb v. Mendoza-Powers, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8089 (CD CA, Jan. 25. 2010), a California federal district court adopted the findings of a magistrate (2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124379 , Oct. 20, 2009) and dismissed without prejudice an inmate's claim that his free exercise rights were violated when he was not excused for religious reasons from complying with prison grooming standards. The court held that this claim is not cognizable in a habeas corpus action.

In Valentine v. Poff, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8253 (WD VA, Feb. 1, 2010), a Virginia federal district court dismissed a frivolous an inmate's challenge to the type of food served to him in his religious diet.

In Blake v. Howland, 2009 Mass. Super. LEXIS 363 (MA Super. Ct., Dec. 2, 2009), a Massachusetts trial court rejected state and federal free exercise claims, claims under RLUIPA and other challenges by a Native American man who is civilly committed as a sexually dangerous person. Plaintiff complained he is denied access to smudging and pipe ceremonies, a purification lodge, various other items needed for Native American worship ceremonies and is also not furnished a Native American volunteer to work with members of his religious group.

In Jamal v. Smith, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5029 (CD IL, Jan. 22, 2010), an Illinois federal district court permitted a Muslim inmate to proceed with his claim that a pat down search of him was conducted by a female officer in violation of his religious objections, even though male officers were readily available. First Amendment Center reports on the case.

A release from the Rutherford Institute reports that it has filed suit in Virginia federal district court challenging a Virginia Department of Corrections directive that prohibits inmates from receiving CDs containing spoken words. The suit was filed on behalf of an inmate wishing to obtain a CD containing a Christian sermon. (Full text of complaint in Mabe v. Commonwealth of Virginia, (ED VA, filed Feb. 3, 2010).

Lawsuit Challenges Library's Meeting Room Policy

A federal civil rights action was filed on Thursday challenging the refusal by the New Smyrna Beach, Florida, Public Library to allow its meeting rooms to be used for a seminar titled "Is Religion Alive in America?". The seminar, which focuses on how Christian principles apply to current events, includes prayer, Bible reading and religious songs. The library rejected the request because its rules prohibit use of meeting rooms, among other things, for religious services. The complaint (full text) in Verdugo v. Volusia County, Florida, (MD FL, filed 2/4/2010), alleges that the policy singles out religious speech for unfavorable treatment. It contends that the rule violates the speech, free exercise and Establishment clauses of 1st Amendment, the due process and equal protection clauses of the 14th Amendments as well as Florida's Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Alliance Defense Fund issued a release announcing the filing of the lawsuit and discussing other similar challenges filed in recent months.