Parents Who Relied on Prayer To Heal Son Sentenced to 16 Months For Negligent Homicide

The Oregonian reports that an Oregon state judge yesterday sentenced Jeffrey and Marci Beagley to 16 months in prison, followed by 3 years probation, after their conviction last month for the criminally negligent homicide of their 16 year old son. The Beagley's, members of the Followers of Christ Church that rejects medical care, prayed for their son rather than seeking medical attention for his urinary tract obstruction. (See prior posting.) Clackamas County Circuit Court Judge Steven Maurer gave a long explanation of his sentencing, saying that too many children had died because of the Followers of Christ Church's beliefs. He said, "It needs to stop." He said that even though the Beagleys "are good people," the magnitude of their crime calls for a prison sentence.

Muslim-Christian Ethnic Massacre In Nigeria Kills 378 Christians

In four Nigerian villages on Sunday, at least 378 members of the Christian Berom ethnic group were killed by members of the Muslim Fulanis. The massacres took place in Zot, Dogo Nahawa, Rastat and Shen. The Wall Street Journal, the London Times and BBC News all report on the massacres. The attackers came at night, fired shots to scare residents out of their homes, and then hacked them with machetes as they rushed out. Some residents were caught in animal traps and fishing nets as they tried to escape, and then hacked to death. Other houses were set on fire with residents in them. Apparently the killings, in villages near the city of Jos, were in revenge for killings in January. (See prior posting.) Survivors reported that Muslims in three of the villages had received phone calls two days before the massacres warning them to leave the area. A BBC analysts says: "These killings are often painted by local politicians as a religious or sectarian conflict. In fact it is a struggle between ethnic groups for fertile land and resources in the region known as Nigeria's Middle Belt."

Supreme Court Grants Cert. In Westboro Baptist Church Funeral Picketing Case

The U.S. Supreme Court this morning granted certiorari in Snyder v. Phelps, (Docket No. 09-751, March 8, 2010). (Order List.) In the case in which review has been granted, the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the Westboro Baptist Church and its leaders that a $5 million judgment against them growing out of their picketing of the funeral of Iraq veteran Matthew Snyder violated their free speech rights. Westboro members have gained notoriety for their picketing of veterans' funerals carrying signs attacking America's acceptance of gays. In the case, Snyder's father claimed that the picketing and a related Internet posting amounted to an invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The majority held that defendants' picket signs, while "utterly distasteful," nevertheless involve matters of public concern. The 4th Circuit also held that the signs and Internet postings were merely "imaginative and hyperbolic rhetoric intended to spark debate," and could not be interpreted as verifiable facts about Snyder or his son. (See prior posting.)

UPDATE: Here is the petition for certiorari and the brief in opposition (thanks to SCOTUS blog).

Speculation Surrounds Mixed-Faith Wedding Ceremony for Chelsea Clinton

AP last week reported on the questions surrounding arrangements for the upcoming wedding of Chelsea Clinton, daughter of the former President Bill Clinton and of the current Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. In particular, papers are speculating on whether her wedding will be performed by a rabbi since her fiance, Marc Mezvinsky, is Jewish. Chelsea grew up attending a Methodist church with her mother. Many rabbis will not officiate at a mixed-faith ceremony, but some will. The United Methodist Church leaves the question of mixed-faith ceremonies to local pastors and allows ministers to adapt the wedding ceremony to some extent in such cases.

School Guidance Director Sues, Claiming Animus From Orthodox Jewish Board Members

In Lawrence, New York, the school district's guidance director who was denied tenure filed a lawsuit charging that his dismissal stems from the ongoing tension between Orthodox Jews who took control of the Lawrence school board in 2006 and the community's non-Orthodox residents. (See prior posting.) According to Sunday's Newsday, Jay Silverstein (a Duke-educated psychologist) says he was advised by his superintendent that he would be more likely to get tenure if he became friendlier with board members and with a fellow administrator who was said to be Orthodox and influential. Silverstein, who plans to run for the school board in May, is Jewish, but non-practicing. Co-workers praise Silverstein's job performance, but school board president Murray Forman called Silverstein's action "another frivolous lawsuit." [Thanks to Joel Katz (Relig. & State In Israel) for the lead.]

Recent Articles and Book of Interest

From SSRN:

• Christian Behrendt, State Norms and Religious Norms: Summary Reflections on Some of their Characteristics (Règles Étatiques Et Règles Religieuses: Brèves Réflexions Sur Certaines De Leurs Caractéristiques), (Revue de la Faculté de droit de l'Université de Liège, pp. 287-294, 2009).
• Nathan B. Oman, Natural Law and the Rhetoric of Empire: Reynolds v. United States, Polygamy, and Imperialism, (William & Mary Law School Research Paper No. 09-43, Feb. 26, 2010).
• Jill I. Goldenziel, Sanctioning Faith: Religion, State, and U.S.-Cuban Relations, (Journal of Law and Politics, Vol. 25, p. 179, 2009).
• Peter J. Smith & Robert W. Tuttle, Biblical Literalism and Constitutional Originalism, (GWU Legal Studies Research Paper, March 1, 2010).
• Gregory K, Acquaviva & John D. Castiglione, Judicial Diversity on State Supreme Courts, (Seton Hall Law Review, Vol. 39, No. 4, pp. 1203-1261, 2009).
• Gabriel Hallevy, Culture Crimes Against Women, (February 15, 2010).
• Mark Kende, Free Exercise of Religion: A Pragmatic and Comparative Assessment, (University of South Dakota Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Howard M. Wasserman, Iqbal, Procedural Mismatches, and Civil Rights Litigation, (Lewis & Clark Law Review, Vol. 14, p. 157, 2010.
• Tom Tyler, Stephen J. Schulhofer & Azuz Z. Huq, Legitimacy and Deterrence Effects in Counter-Terrorism Policing: A Study of Muslim Americans, (Law and Society Review, Forthcoming).

New Book:

• Douglas Laycock, Religious Liberty, Volume 1: Overviews and History, (Eedrmans, 2010).

Report Says Scientology Staff Members Are Treated Abusively

This morning's New York Times carries a front-page article on allegations by two former staff members of the Church of Scientology regarding abuse of staff mebers. Reporting on charges by Chris and Christie Colbran, who were recruited as teenagers to work for the elite corps of staff members known as Sea Org, the Times says:

They signed a contract for a billion years — in keeping with the church's belief that Scientologists are immortal. They worked seven days a week, often on little sleep, for sporadic paychecks of $50 a week, at most.

But after 13 years and growing disillusionment, the Collbrans decided to leave the Sea Org, setting off on a Kafkaesque journey that they said required them to sign false confessions about their personal lives and their work, pay the church thousands of dollars it said they owed for courses and counseling, and accept the consequences as their parents, siblings and friends who are church members cut off all communication with them.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Camacho v. Shields, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 4489 (9th Cir., March 3, 2010), the 9th Circuit upheld a lower court's finding that a prisoner's religious exercise was not substantially burdened by the interruption of his prayers on one occasion.

In Witcher v. Maclunny, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17382 (MD PA, Feb. 26, 2010), a Pennsylvania federal district court dismissed a prisoner's complaint regarding the removal of 25 religious books, finding that plaintiff failed to allege how this substantially burdened his ability to observe a central religious belief or practice.

In Brown v. Ray, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17363 (WD VA, Feb. 26, 2010), a Virginia federal magistrate judge dismissed on qualified immunity grounds the damage claim, but not the claim for injunctive relief, brought by a Nation of Islam inmate who alleged that he is being denied his weekly NOI newspaper, The Final Call. It also dismissed certain other related claims for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, but permitted others to proceed.

In Banks v. Dougherty, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17443 (ND IL, Feb. 26, 2010), an Illinois federal district court dismissed on mootness and sovereign immunity grounds claims by Muslims confined in a state mental health facility that the facility did not offer Friday Jumu'ah services.

In Butts v. Riley, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17517 (WD MI, Feb. 26, 2010), a Michigan federal district court upheld a prison's refusal, for lack of sincere religious belief, to furnish plaintiff a kosher diet.

In Chappell v. Helder, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18056 (WD AK, March 1, 2010), an Arkansas federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125391, Dec. 14, 2009), and ordered the Washington County Detention Center to revise its policies on religious presentations and use of reading materials during lockout periods. It also awarded nominal damages. Plaintiff complained that he was forced to overhear religious presentations being given in the day room during lockout periods and that the only religious reading material inmates were allowed to have during lockout was the Bible.

In Hundal v. Salazar, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18837 (CD CA, March 3, 2010), a California federal district court adopted a federal magistrate's recommendations (2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125479, Dec. 16, 2009) and held that a Sikh prisoner can file an amended complaint against certain defendants alleging RLUIPA violations in refusing to permit him to wear a beard. However it dismissed his Free Exercise and Equal Protection claims and his RLUIPA claim against one defendant.

In LaRue v. Matheney , (SD WV, March 4, 2010), a West Virginia federal district court rejected a free exercise claim by a prisoner who had agreed to participate in the institution's treatment program. Plaintiff signed an Individual Therapy Contract obligating him to participate in treatment sessions and to refrain from certain conduct relating to children and to sexual matters. He now claims that his inability to keep pornography in his cell violates his beliefs as a member of the Christian Prurient Faith, a ministry which he founded. The court held that the burden with which he challenges was imposed on him because of a valid contract which he voluntarily entered.

In Peterman v. Berry, (ED WI, Feb. 26, 2010), a Wisconsin federal district court rejected complaints from a Muslim inmate that he was not provided a Halal diet, he was not allowed to order various religious items, there was no Muslim group worship, and he was required to purchase a Q'uran while Bibles were given out for free. The court found that the jail attempted to accommodate plaintiff's requests and that any failure to do so was not the result of any official policy or custom of the jail.

Hasidic Charity Can Claim Return of Seized Funds Only In Criminal Case

Friday's New Jersey Law Journal reports that a federal magistrate judge has ruled that a Hasidic Jewish charity cannot rely on 18 USC Sec. 983 to obtain a return of funds seized as part of a high profile public corruption and money laundering case. (See prior posting.) The court held that Gmach Shefa Chaim has an adequate remedy in a criminal case in which the government is suing for forfeiture of the $508,925 in the account. The court ruled that Sec. 983 only applies only to nonjudicial civil forfeitures of $500,000 or less and not to funds seized under a search warrant. [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

Virginia's AG Says State Colleges Cannot Ban LGBT Discrimination

According to the Washington Post, Virginia's Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II on Thursday sent a letter (full text) to the state's public colleges and universities advising them that:

the law and public policy of the Commonwealth of Virginia prohibit a college or university from including "sexual orientation," "gender identity," "gender expression," or like classification, as a protected class within its non-discrimination policy, absent specific authorization from the General Assembly.

Taxpayer Lacks Standing To Challenge Church's Use of School; Parent May Have Standing

In Henley v. Cleveland Board of Education, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18892 (ND OH, March 3, 2010), an Ohio federal district court held that a local taxpayer lacks standing to bring an Establishment Clause challenge to the practice of a local high school in permitting a church to use the school building for its weekly religious services. The court held that it was unable at this stage of the litigation to determine whether or not a second plaintiff, the mother of a school child, had alleged sufficient injury to her child under the Establishment Clause to have standing.

UPDATE: In Henley v. Cleveland Board of Education, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21876 (March 10, 2010), the court denied a motion for reconsideration.

9th Circuit Says Christians In Indonesia Face Likely Persecution, Torture

In Pelle v. Holder, (9th Cir., March 4, 2010), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals held that the Board of Immigration Appeals should have applied disfavored group analysis in deciding whether appellant faced a clear probability of future persecution. Christians who are not ethnic Chinese are a disfavored group in Indonesia. Further, in the court's view, there was ample evidence that the Indonesian government is aware, and possibly complicit, in torture inflicted on Christians by Muslim extremists.

Qualified Immunity Applies To RFRA Claim Growing Out of Drug Search

In Jama v. United States, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18554 (WD WA, March 2, 2010), a Washington federal district court held that the concept of qualified immunity applies in suits under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, just as it applies in suits charging constitutional violations. It concluded that a police officer and a federal DEA agent had qualified immunity in a Muslim woman's lawsuit against them charging they had violated RFRA in forcing her to remain outside her apartment in a nightgown without her head covered while her apartment was being searched for evidence of khat distribution. No evidence was found. Two others detained in the same raid were unrelated males. Plaintiff's Muslim faith prohibits her from appearing in a state of undress or from appearing without a head scarf before unrelated males. In granting qualified immunity, the court held that it could not conclude that the right of a person to wear religious covering during a search of a her home was "clearly established" at the time of the search.

Court Issues Preliminary Injunction Barring Noise Prosecutions Against Church Bells

In St. Mark Roman Catholic Parish Phoenix v. City of Phoenix, (D AZ, March 3, 2010), an Arizona federal district court issued a preliminary injunction barring the City of Phoenix from enforcing its Noise Ordinance against sound generated in the course of religious expression. The lawsuit was brought by churches which had been prosecuted or feared prosecution under the ordinance because of the level of sound from their carillon bells. (See prior posting 1, 2). The challenged law prohibits "unreasonably loud, disturbing and unnecessary noise." Plaintiffs alleged that the law's restrictions are unconstitutionally vague and violate their free expression and free exercise rights, as well as their rights under Arizona's Free Exercise of Religion Act. In granting the preliminary injunction, the court, focusing on plaintiffs' free expression challenge, said:

The Court finds, for the purposes of preliminary injunction analysis, that the Noise
Ordinance is neither precise enough nor clear enough to be considered narrowly tailored. The Noise Ordinance does not contain an objective standard, such as a decibel level, under which loud, disturbing, and unnecessary sounds are targeted to the exclusion of sounds that are not loud, disturbing, and unnecessary. Also, the exemptions from the Noise Ordinance are a scattershot list, providing an exception for government vehicles, noncommercial public addresses, ice cream trucks (or other uses of hand-held devices playing "pleasing melodies"),and nighttime street work, but not considering any other types of sound to be exempt from coverage. The government's interest in preventing the disturbance of its citizens by noise could be achieved by other, less restrictive means.

Alliance Defense Fund issued a release announcing the decision.

Religious Questionnaire To City Candidates Draws Criticism

In Farmington, New Mexico's recent municipal elections, the campaign manager for one of the losing City Council candidates secretly designed a scorecard to rank local candidates on their religious and social values. Yesterday's Farmington Daily Times says that candidate Bob Moon did not know that his campaign manager, Drew Degner, had designed the questionnaire that asked closed-end questions about issues such as church attendance, abortion rights and gay marriage. Some candidates refused to answer the questions and are critical of it. Degner said he designed the survey in order to help fellow Emmanuel Baptist Church members determine candidates' values. He did not distribute the scorecard beyond his church. Moon, a pastor, only posted a copy on the bulletin board at his church, My Father's House.

4th Circuit Upholds Church's Discrimination and RLUIPA Claims

In Reaching Hearts International, Inc. v. Prince George's County, (4th Cir., March 3, 2010), the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with a Maryland federal district court that a Seventh Day Adventist Congregation's rights under the Equal Protection Clause and RLUIPA were infringed when the county refused to grant a change in sewer and water classifications for a portion of property on which it planned to build a church. The court concluded:

the evidence presented at trial of the County's anti-church animus was very strong. The evidence thus supports the jury’s conclusion that (1) the County intentionally discriminated against Reaching Hearts on a prohibited ground, and (2) the County imposed or implemented a land use regulation in a manner that imposed a substantial burden on Reaching Heart’s religious exercise, without satisfying the standard of strict scrutiny.

Yesterday's Washington Post reports on the decision.

State Employees Say Boss Judged Them On the Quality of Their Religious Faith

The director of the Ohio Workers' Compensation Council is being accused of religious discrimination by her three-member staff-- two attorneys and an executive assistant. According to yesterday's Columbus Dispatch, Virginia McInerney, director of the Council that oversees the operations of Ohio's Bureau of Workers' Compensation, fired the staffers after they asked for separation agreements because of insurmountable inter-office tensions. The staffers say that McInerney, who often asked them to pray, was judging them "not on professional performance but on the quality of their faith, according to her beliefs." In letters to the state senator who chairs the Council, the three said McInerney told them she believed God placed her in her job and that the source of office conflict was an "inability to recognize her 'divine gift for editing.'"

Anti-Evolutionists Tying Curriculum Efforts To Global Warming Skepticism

Today's New York Times reports that critics of evolution who want alternative theories taught in public schools are beginning to tie that effort together with a similar push to encourage teaching of alternative theories about global warming. The strategy, being pursued in various states, builds on growing numbers of conservatives who have doubts about the science of climate change. Rev. Jim Ball of the Evangelical Environmental Network, a group that agrees with the science of global warming, says that many religious opponents believe "it is hubris to think that human beings could disrupt something that God created." As a legal matter, those tying the two issues together are reacting in part to a statement in a 2005 federal district court opinion finding that Cobb County, Georgia's singling out of evolution as a questionable theory in textbook stickers had the effect of advancing religion.

Church Lacks Standing To Sue Over Investigation of Its Loud Music

In Faith Baptist Church v. Waterford Township, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18226 (ED MI, March 2, 2010), a Michigan federal district court held that a church lacks standing to complain about police investigations of complaints about the volume of music coming from the church during rehearsals, services and concerts. (See prior posting). The court said:

Plaintiffs have not articulated any concrete or particularized injury. FBC continues to hold services with the music of its choosing. There is no allegation that the nature of FBC's religious services changed in any way in response to the investigation of the noise complaints. There is no specific allegation that any right to free association has been impinged or that any church members were deterred from worshiping.... There is no allegation that FBC was ordered to stop their music or that anyone was ticketed, charged, or fined. In fact, Waterford's disturbing the peace ordinance, which they challenge as vague and overbroad, was not enforced against them. Further, the evidence suggests that Waterford does not have a present intention to enforce the ordinance against them....

Although the complaint alleges that the actions of the prosecutor and police have caused a "chilling effect" -- such bare allegations are insufficient to confer standing.

Texas Republicans Support Religious Reference At Public Gatherings and On Government Buildings

Tuesday's Texas Republican primary ballot included five "non-binding resolutions that are the party's way of gauging support for issues, and for informing voters and elected officials where the party's grassroots stand on the issues." One of those, Ballot Prop. #4 read:

The use of the word "God", prayers, and the Ten Commandments should be allowed at public gatherings and public educational institutions, as well as be permitted on government buildings and property.

The advisory measure passed by an overwhelming 95.14% majority, with 11.1% of the state's registered voters participating. (Official results.) Apparently this same measure will appear on the November general election ballot. (San Marcos Daily Record). Yesterday American Atheists issued a press release warning that if this proposal is formally adopted in the state, "it will prove to be unconstitutional and expensive for state taxpayers."