Religion Clause

Wednesday, April 14, 2010

ABC Talks With Russian President About Religious Faith

ABC News yesterday reported on an extensive interview of Russian President Dmitry Medvedev by reporter George Stephanopoulos. Part of the interview focused on Medvedev's religious faith. ABC says:

Medvedev is his own man in another significant way. Unlike many of his predecessors, this Russian leader has publicly declared his faith. He was baptized a Russian Orthodox Christian when he was 23 years old.

Asked why he embraced religion when he was raised in a secular nation, Medvedev replied that he "needed it." "Why do people go to church?" he said. "They come because they feel a need, except if they're sightseeing. So at 23 I felt I needed it. I believe it's good for me, because afterwards my life changed.

"You don't really talk aloud about something like that because the religious feelings should be somewhere deep inside of you. If someone is displaying it, it's not really honest. It's more PR for yourself. But I believe religion is important for every person."

Dissolution Decree Lets Father Take Daughter To Church During Visitation Times

In a widely-followed divorce case, a Chicago trial judge yesterday as part of an opinion dissolving the marriage of Robert and Rebecca Reyes ruled that Robert can take their 3-year old daughter Ela to Catholic church services despite the objection of Rebecca. As reported by the Chicago Sun-Times, Robert converted to Judaism after Ela was born and the couple had agreed to raise Ela in the Jewish faith. However, after their separation, Robert returned to his original Catholic faith, claiming he had been pressured by his in-laws to convert. While dissolution proceedings were pending, Robert had Ela baptised, and in response Rebecca obtained a restraining order directing Joseph to only expose Ela to Judaism. All of this became the subject of much media coverage, largely instigated by Joseph. (See prior posting.)

In a 30-page dissolution judgment (full text), Cook County Circuit Court Judge Rene Goldfarb, focusing on the best interests of Ela, ruled that Rebecca would be given custody, but that Joseph will have visitation rights (including Christmas and Easter each year), and can take Ela to church during those times. In its opinion, the court said that Rebecca feared possible future confusion and harm if Ela was taken to church by her father. While the judge was highly critical of some of Joseph's behavior, she said no evidence was presented that taking the 3-year old to church is or would be harmful to her.

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

Obama's Statement Marking Yom Hashoah Is Released

On Sunday, President Obama issued a statement (full text) marking Holocaust Remembrance Day (Yom Hashoah). The observance date corresponds to the anniversary, on the Hebrew calendar, of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. (Background.) This year the observance was held on April 12. The President said in part:

On my visit to Buchenwald last year – and during my visit to Yad Vashem in 2008 – I bore witness to the horrors of anti-Semitism and the capacity for evil represented by the Nazis’ campaign to annihilate the Jewish people and so many others. But even at places like Buchenwald, the dignity and courage of those who endured the horrors of the Holocaust remind us of humanity’s capacity for decency and compassion.

The memories of the victims serve as a constant reminder to honor their legacy by renewing our commitment to prevent genocide, and to confront anti-Semitism and prejudice in all of its forms. We must never tolerate the hateful stereotypes and prejudice against the Jewish people that tragically continues to this day.

Meanwhile, CNN reports on a Tel Aviv University study released Sunday which shows that anti-Semitic incidents around the world more than doubled from 2008 to 2009. Part of the increase is attributed to Israel's operations in Gaza beginning in late 2008.

3rd Circuit: No Qualified Immunity In Suit Challenging Refusal To Issue "Choose Life" Plates

Children First Foundation, Inc. v. Legreide, (3d Cir., April 9, 2010), is a challenge to New Jersey's rejection of an application for the issuance of "Choose Life" license plates under the statute that permits issuance of special plates to members of non-profit groups. The trial court dismissed the complaint finding that defendants had qualified immunity. The U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and remanded, holding that here it is alleged that defendants engaged in viewpoint discrimination in rejecting the proposed plates. The ban on regulation based on the viewpoint or ideology of the speaker is clearly established. AP (via First Amendment Center) reported on the decision.

Campaign In Britain For Arrest of Pope Benedict

The London Telegraph reported Sunday on a campaign by well-known atheists Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens to ask the Crown Prosecution Service to arrest Pope Benedict XVI on criminal charges under international law when he visits London on September 16-19. Hitchens and Dawkins are conferring with human rights lawyers on what charges can be brought against the Pope because of his alleged role-- when he was head of the Congregation of the Doctrine of Faith-- in delaying action against an American priest who had molested two boys. Lawyers argue that the Pope will not be able to claim diplomatic immunity because the Vatican should not be treated as a state under international law. [Thanks to Bob Ritter for the lead.]

Evangelicals Urge Christian Approach To Nuclear Reduction

As the Nuclear Security Summit convened in Washington, D.C. (White House statement), yesterday Ekklesia reported on the "Matthew 5 Project: Evangelicals for Nuclear Reduction." Evangelical leaders, including Rick Warren, have sent a statement (full text) to the President, Vice President, Secretaries of State and Defense, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and all members of Congress. The statement reads in part:

In order to safeguard life, liberty, community, and security for its own citizens and for the world, the United States must demonstrate moral leadership in protecting the human rights of the most vulnerable, strengthening the rule of law in the international community, and seeking diplomatic negotiations with allies and enemies alike..... We urge churches to teach members ethics for discernment, including just peacemaking practices based on the teachings of Jesus.... We encourage church groups to consider engaging in interfaith dialogue and witness, and in building international partnership with fellow Christians around the world. We call for governmental action to oppose the rise in global terrorism by working for international justice and peacemaking. We call for verifiable international reduction of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. We affirm that overcoming the threat of global poverty, global warming, global terrorism, regional insecurity, and nuclear war requires international cooperation. We call for obedience to the Lordship of Christ in all that we do, including talking with an adversary and seeking to make peace.

UPDATE: Another Christian organization with significant evangelical support that is pressing for the abolition of nuclear weapons is the Two Futures Project, organized in 2009. (Faith in Public Life, April 2009). [Thanks to Kristin Williams for the lead.]

Vatican Posts New Guidelines On Clerical Sexual Abuse Investigations

Voice of America reported yesterday that the Vatican has posted simple new guidelines on its website outlining how complaints of clerical sexual abuse of minors are to be handled. The Vatican's Guide (full text) provides in part:

The local diocese investigates every allegation of sexual abuse of a minor by a cleric.

If the allegation has a semblance of truth the case is referred to the CDF [Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith]. The local bishop transmits all the necessary information to the CDF and expresses his opinion on the procedures to be followed and the measures to be adopted in the short and long term.

Civil law concerning reporting of crimes to the appropriate authorities should always be followed.
During the preliminary stage and until the case is concluded, the bishop may impose precautionary measures to safeguard the community, including the victims....

A Reuters report published in the New York Times says: "Although the rules are not new, their publication in a short, simple format reflects the Roman Catholic Church's determination to deflect criticism that its response to the sex abuse scandal has been bureaucratic, secretive and defensive."

Monday, April 12, 2010

Connecticut Bishops Oppose Ending Statute of Limitations On Child Sex Abuse Claims

CNN reported yesterday that Catholic Bishops in Connecticut are urging parishioners to strongly oppose a bill pending in the state legislature that would remove the statute of limitations in child sexual abuse cases. (Full text of HB 5473). A letter from the Bishops reads in part:

Over the past several years in states that have even temporarily eliminated the statutes, it has caused the bankruptcy of at least seven dioceses. House Bill 5473 would make Connecticut the only State without a statute of limitations. This bill would put all Church institutions, including your parish, at risk....

It is important to understand that the claims which could be made under House Bill 5473 might be 50, 60, 70 years old or older. Most often, these claims would be driven by a small number of trial lawyers hoping to profit from these cases. They would be difficult to defend because key individuals are deceased, memories have faded, and documents and other evidence have been lost.

The Diocese of Bridgeport has also posted A Call for Action and a FAQ about the bill.

Bangladesh High Court Says Women Employed In Education Cannot Be Forced To Wear Veil

Asia News reports that Bangladesh's High Court ruled on April 8 that women employed in public educational institutions may not be required to wear the veil, or hijab, against their will. The ruling came in a lawsuit filed after a local government official called the director of an elementary school a "beshya" (prostitute) for not wearing a veil. The High Court concluded that forcing a woman to wear a veil is a violation of basic human rights protected by the Constitution, and called on the Ministry of Education to implement the protection. Some fundamentalist Islamic groups criticized the decision as "a conspiracy to destroy Islam in Bangladesh." [Thanks to Institute on Religion & Public Policy for the lead.]

Additional Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Babcock v. Clarke, (9th Cir., April 6, 2010), the 9th Circuit held that requiring an inmate to use his committed name along with his religious name on correspondence, intead of his religious name alone, and requiring staff to refer to him only by his committed name, does not violate RLUIPA or the free exercise clause.

In Holley v. California Department of Corrections, (9th Cir., April 5, 2010), the 9th Circuit held that California had not waived sovereign immunity in a damage suit by an inmate who claimed that prison regulations requiring him to wear short hair placed a substantial burden on his exercise of religion.

In Henderson v. Langenbrunner, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32558 (MD FL, April 2, 2010), a Florida federal district court rejected a Muslim inmate's complaint over a 35 minute delay in delivering his bagged meal for Ramadan.

In Perez v. New York State Department of Correctional Services, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32500 (ND NY, March 16, 2010), a New York federal magistrate judge rejected an inmate's claim that a strip frisk after a Catholic Family Day event deterred him from attending other Catholic religious services.

In Smith v. Graziano, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33878 (ND NY, April 6, 2010), a New York federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33811, March 16, 2010), and held that an inmate's free exercise rights and his rights under RLUIPA were not infringed when Protestant religious services were not held on two Sundays.

In Robinson v. Roper, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34286 (CD CA, April 7, 2010), a California federal district court adopted a magistrate's findings (2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34281, Feb. 16, 2010), and found no violations of plaintiff's free exercise rights or rights under RLUIPA. Plaintiff, who was confined under the state's violent sexual predator law, complained that during a search of his room, his Bible, Koran and prayer rug were placed on the floor.

In Hazle v. Crofoot, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34108 (ED CA, April 6, 2010), a California federal district court held that parole and correctional officers were liable for violating an Atheist inmate's Establishment Clause rights by requiring him, as a condition of parole, to attend a religion-based 12-step program.

In Myles v. Wallace, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34684 (ND WV, April 8, 2010), a West Virginia federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112631, Nov. 7, 2008) and held that no substantial burden was placed on an inmate's free exercise when two orders of religious materials he placed and paid for were by mistake placed in the chapel library instead of being delivered to him.

RLUIPA Suit Challenges Denial of Rezoning For Islamic Learning Center

The Council on American-Islamic relations last week announced that it had filed a RLUIPA lawsuit in federal court in Chicago challenging DuPage County's rejection of a zoning permit for the Irshad Learning Center that would serve some 30 Shia Muslim families primarily of Middle Eastern origin. No reasons were given by the County Board for rejecting the Naperville location, and Muslim community members fear the decision was influenced by anti-Islamic attitudes. The Chicago Tribune reports that the county's Development Committee had approved the project, but the Zoning Committee voted against it. Anti-Muslim demonstrations took place outside the County Board meeting. Before the vote, opponents claimed the Center had financial ties to a foundation suspected of aiding Iran's nuclear weapons program. Proponents believe the county imposed higher standards on the school than it would have done for a non-Muslim institution.

Sunday, April 11, 2010

British Religious Leaders Want Special Judicial Panel To Hear Religious Rights Cases

Today's London Times reports that Lord Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, and other church leaders will support a motion being filed by attorneys for Christain relationship counsellor Gary McFarlane calling for a special Court of Appeals panel of five judges who understand religious issues to be appointed to hear McFarlane's appeal and future appeals involving religious rights. At issue in McFarlane's case is a ruling by the Employment Appeal Tribunal that religious discrimination prohibitions were not violated when McFarlane was dismissed by a counselling service for refusing to counsel same-sex couples. (See prior posting.) Critics of the court say that a series of rulings have shown a lack of understanding of Christian beliefs. They point especially to an opinion by Lord Neuberger, the Master of the Rolls, rejecting a complaint by marriage registrar Lillian Ladele who was disciplined when she refused to perform civil partnership ceremonies for same-sex couples. (See prior posting.)

Dutch Supreme Court Tells Christian Political Party To Give Women Leadership Roles

According to AP, Netherlands Supreme Court on Friday rejected religious freedom arguments and ruled that the fundamentalist Christian inspired Political Reformed Party (SGP) must accept women in leadership roles. The court held that the party's policies are in conflict with the 1979 U.N. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. SGP has held two or three seats in Parliament since the 1920's and says that its policy stems from Biblical values. After the decision was announced, SGP released its slate of all male candidates for national elections in June. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Minister-Social Worker's Claim Under Title VII Survives Motion To Dismiss

In Moore v. Metropolitan Human Service District, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34808 (ED LA, April 7, 2010), a Louisiana federal district court held that an ordained minister employed as a social worker at a state agency that provides services to individuals with addictive disorders stated a plausible religious discrimination claim under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Plaintiff Beulah Moore answered religious questions posed to her by patients. Her employer gave her an ultimatum to stop speaking about God at work, or else resign. The court held:

The Court finds that Metropolitan's argument that its conduct was appropriate because it prohibited Bible-based study at a state facility misses the point. Moore alleges that Metropolitan said she could not mention God at work.... If Moore's allegation is true-and the Court must assume that it is at this stage of the proceedings -a reasonable inference to draw is that Metropolitan prohibited Moore from mentioning God even when she was not speaking with Metropolitan clients. Such an unconditional prohibition could run afoul of Metropolitan's duty to reasonably accommodate Moore's religious beliefs. Moore's direct religious discrimination claim therefore survives Metropolitan's motion to dismiss.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Abdulhaseeb v. Calbone (10th Cir., April 2, 2010), the 10th Circuit held that a Muslim prisoner adequately demonstrated the existence of a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the denial of halal food, and the denial of halal meat for an Islamic feast, substantially burdened his religious exercise. The 10th Circuit in the case for the first time for its circuit defined "substantial burden" under RLUIPA. Its definition includes requiring or imposing substantial pressure on an individual to engage in, or refrain from, conduct that violates a sincerely held religious belief.

In Nasious v. Grayson, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30409 (D CO, March 29, 2010), a Colorado federal district court agreed with a federal magistrate (2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30498, Feb. 17, 2010), that the policy of a detention facility to issue a single eating utensil, a spoon, to each inmate for the inmate to keep did not substantially burden plaintiff's religious exercise. Plaintiff claimed that his Jewish faith required that his kosher meals be eaten with disposable eating utensils.

In Goodson v. Maggi, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30058 (WD PA, March 1, 2010), in an opinion largely focusing on other issues, a federal magistrate judge held that plaintiff, an inmate, had failed to allege how his inability to access a spiritual advisor and attend church services created a substantial burden or substantially impacted his ability to exercise a central tenet of his religion. However he was given an opportunity to amend his complaint.

In Blumenthal v. Armstrong, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30050 (WD MI, March 29, 2010), a Michigan federal district court adopted recommendations of a magistrate (2010 U.S. Dist LEXIS 20174, Feb. 10, 2010), and upheld a prison's decision to remove an inmate from receiving a kosher diet based on his lack of adherence to Jewish religious practices and his purchasing of non-kosher items from the prison's store.

In Massenburg v. Adams, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31226 (ED VA, March 31, 2010), a Virginia federal magistrate judge denied both defendants' motion to dismiss and plaintiff's motion for summary judgment in a damage action in which plaintiff, a member of the House of Israel, complained that he was given a job assignment that required him to work on his Sabbath.

In Pouncil v. Tilton, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31094 (ED CA, March 31, 2010), a California federal district court held that a Muslim prisoner serving a life sentence properly stated a claim under RLUIPA in his challenge to a rule that prohibited him, in violation of his Muslim faith, from having conjugal visits with his wife.

In Barendt v. Gibbons, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31004 (D NV, March 30, 2010), a Nevada federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31011, Feb. 11, 2010), holding that plaintiff failed to demonstrate a substantial burden on his free exercise of religion under RLUIPA. Plaintiff who is Jewish claimed that the nightly count of inmates took place at the time of pre-Shabbat candle lighting, barring the ability to hold a group ceremony until later.

In Leonard v. Louisiana, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31892 (WD LA, March 31, 2010), a Louisiana federal district court held that defendant's free exercise rights and his rights under RLUIPA were infringed by a prison's refusal to permit him to receive Nation of Islam's newspaper The Final Call solely because each issue contains "The Muslim Program" written by Elijah Muhammad.

In Strutton v. Meade, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31944 (ED MO, March 31, 2010), a Missouri federal district court rejected complaints by an inmate being held indefinitely under the state's violent sexual predator law that a second Wiccan religious service each week was not permitted because there was no volunteer leader. It also rejected on pleading grounds his complaint that at one time he was not permitted to make Wiccan objects in Arts and Crafts class. Finally it rejected his claim that pressure from fellow-inmates at one AA meeting to recite the serenity prayer amounted to an Establishment Clause violation.

Mintun v. Peterson, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31598 (D ID, March 30, 2010), involves a claim by a gay inmate that he was prevented from participating in the inmate-run choir or Christian Fellowship services because of beliefs of fellow inmates that homosexuality is a sin. An Idaho federal district court denied defendants' motion for summary judgment on plaintiff's free exercise and RLUIPA claims for lack of evidence. The court rejected plaintiff's retaliation and equal protection claims.

In Levy v. Holinka, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31743 (WD WI, Marach 30, 2010), a Wisconsin federal district court rejected RFRA, free exercise and establishment clause claims of a Hebrew Israelite prisoner who complained that he was not permitted to wear a turban.

Saturday, April 10, 2010

Unique Arrangement For Catholic Schools Converted To Charter Schools

In Indianapolis, Indiana last Monday, officials approved the conversion of two Catholic elementary schools into taxpayer-supported charter schools. According to today's Louisville (KY) Courier-Journal, unlike similar conversions in New York City and Washington, D.C. (see prior postings 1, 2) where the charter schools were then operated by secular organizations, in Indianapolis they will be operated by ADI Charter Schools, Inc., a non-profit group organized by the Catholic archdiocese. The schools will end religious education classes during the school day and will remove or cover religious symbols and displays. They will teach a secular version of the character education program already in use. Bookkeeping for state funds will be done off-site.

11th Circuit: Ministerial Exception Doctrine Applies To Suits Under Section 1981

In McCants v. Alabama-West Florida Conference of the United Methodist Church, Inc., (11th Cir., April 5, 2010), the 11th Circuit dismissed a suit brought by an African-American former pastor of the United Methodist Church against his former church employer. The lawsuit, brought under 42 USC Sec. 1981, charged racial discrimination and retaliation in preventing him from being reappointed pastor of two congregations. The court held that the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses require the "ministerial exception" doctrine to extend to suits under Section 1981, as well as to Title VII lawsuits.

5th Circuit Hears Oral Arguments In Religious Candy Cane Lawsuit

On Wednesday, the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in Moran v. Plano Independent School District. (Audio recording of oral arguments.) Last December, the 5th Circuit remanded to the district court the question of whether school rules in effect prior to 2005 that restricted the distribution of materials by students were constitutional. The rules were challenged after they were applied to bar a students from distributing religious themed candy cane pens. While new rules adopted in 2005 were upheld, the question of nominal damages against school officials for enforcing the old rules remained open. (See prior posting.) The district court on remand ruled against school officials. As reported by the Dallas Morning News, the appeal argued Wednesday focused on the question of whether the school principals involved had qualified immunity for their conduct. This turns on whether constitutional rules regarding the free speech rights of elementary school students to distribute non-curricular materials were "clearly established." During oral arguments, both sides avoided answering a question from Judge Catharina Hayes, who asked: "Why does Plano seem to have so many issues?" Liberty Institute, which represents the students in the case, issued a press release on the oral arguments.

Friday, April 09, 2010

Ecclesiastical Abstention Applies To Both Congregational and Hierarchical Churches

In Ad Hoc Committee of Parishioners of Our Lady of the Son Catholic Church, Inc. v. Reiss, (AZ App., Feb. 23, 2010), an Arizona appellate court held that the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine applies to congregational churches in the same way that it applies to hierarchical ones. The court dismissed claims that Father Paul Andrade was improperly appointed as priest and Board Member of the separate Tridentine congregation because he was not validly ordained before 1968, as required by the church's articles.. It also dismissed a second claim that the Board improperly removed Father Andrade, holding that his firing was a purely ecclesiastical matter. Finally it dismissed a dispute among factions in the church over use of church funds.