Objective coverage of church-state and religious liberty developments, with extensive links to primary sources.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
North Carolina City Council Switches From Moment of Silence To Invocation
10th Circuit Upholds Church's RLUIPA Victory, Avoids Deciding Constitutionality of RLUIPA
Monday, May 17, 2010
Sri Lanka Charges Muslim Convert With Insulting Buddhism By Publishing Books
Christian Group Launches 8th Annual Campaign To Encourage Graduation Prayer
Recent Articles and Books of Interest
From SSRN:
- Steven Lubet, Why the Dreyfus Affair Does and Doesn't Matter, (Green Bag, Vol. 13, No. 2, p. 331, 2010).
- Timothy Stewart-Winter & Simon Stern, Picturing Same-Sex Marriage in the Antebellum United States: The Union of 'Two Most Excellent Men' in Longstreet's 'A Sage Conversation', (Journal of the History of Sexuality, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 197-222, May 2010).
- Gail F. Mason, Hate Crime Laws in Australia: Are They Achieving Their Goals?, (Criminal Law Journal, Vol. 33, No. 6, pp. 326-340, 2009).
- Mark J. Cowan, Nonprofits and the Sales and Use Tax, (Florida Tax Review, Forthcoming).
Recent Books:
- Amy Scobee, Scientology: Abuse At the Top, (Scobee Publishing, May 2010).
- Melanie Phillips, The World Turned Upside Down: The Global Battle over God, Truth, and Power, (Encounter Books, April 2010).
- S.E. Cupp, Losing Our Religion: The Liberal Media's Attack on Christianity, (Threshold Editions, April 2010).
- Ian Johnson, A Mosque in Munich: Nazis, the CIA, and the Rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in the West, (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, May 2010).
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Holder Testifies About Religious-Based Hiring By Funded Faith-Based Groups
Scott: Let’s be clear. Is the policy of this administration to allow discrimination? Is the policy of the administration going to be that discrimination will not be allowed?(See prior related posting.)
Holder: We are -- yes, that is not the view that we share. We do not have a view that discrimination is, is appropriate. And we want to, as I said, interact with these organizations where these issues are presented in such a way that we are acting consistent with the law and acting, again, consistent with what our values are, both as a nation and as an administration.
Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases
In Richardson v. Walker, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44717 (SD IL, May 7, 2010), an Illinois federal district court allowed an inmate to move ahead with his claim that his free exercise rights were infringed when he was subjected to tuberculosis testing that violated his religious beliefs.
In Mansker v. McKinzy, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44909 (ED CA, May 6, 2010), a California federal magistrate judge recommended dismissal of a Wiccan inmate's 1st Amendment and RLUIPA claims that he was prevented from attending religious services on several occasions. He did not allege that his religion required regular attendance at services, and thus did not adequately allege a substantial burden on his free exercise rights.
In El-Shaddai v. Clark, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46304 (ED CA, April 12, 2010), a California magistrate judge dismissed, with leave to amend, a Muslim inmate's complaint that his free exercise rights were violated when authorities refused to process his appeals requesting receipt of prayer oils he had ordered.
In Le'Taxione X v. Rochon, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46165 (WD WA, May 11, 2010), a Washington federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46300, April 9, 2010), and dismissed free exercise claims by a Nation of Islam prisoner. Plaintiff had objected to officials insisting that the day room door remain open during Ramadan services. Accommodations made to provide NOI separate Al-Jumu'ah services and study groups mooted a second free exercise claim.
In Espinosa v. Addams, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46177 (ED CA, April 8, 2010), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed an inmate's complaint that his free exercise and free speech rights were violated when the prison contraband rules were invoked to prevent his access to a Wiccan book his family had purchased that containted partial nudity.
In Young v. Kadien, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46685 (WD NY, May 5, 2010), a New York federal district court allowed an inmate who practiced the religion of "Creator of Heaven and Earth and All Things Beautiful" to move ahead with his RLUIPA claim regarding his right to grow his hair and beard for religious reasons.
In Simpson v. Feltsen, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46323 (ED CA, April 9, 2010), a California federal district court held plaintiff's charge that prison officials harassed him about his dreadlocks did not state a free exercise claim.
In Tapp v. Proto, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47075 (ED PA, May 12, 2010), a Pennsylvania federal district court rejected a Black Jewish inmate's claims that his right to religious expression was violated when officials took time to investigate his religious needs in the first two weeks of his commitment, and when they thereafter failed to provide enough menu variety and consistent food preparation.
In Phillips v. Ayers, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47281 (CD CA, May 12, 2010), a California federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47263, Jan. 14, 2010) and refused to dismiss a claim that denying use of the prison chapel for Muslim worship without a sponsor violated RLUIPA.
Texas Board of Education Member Will Propose New Establishment Clause Focus In Social Studies
Arizona Governor Signs Bill Giving New Religious Land Use Protections
Saturday, May 15, 2010
Patriarchate In Republic of Georgia Wants Legislation To Protect Against Religious Insult
6th Circuit Denies Motions To File Amicus Briefs In Ministerial Exception Rehearing Bid
Friday, May 14, 2010
Split 6th Circuit Panel Denies Rehearing In 10 Commandments Case
Canadian Court Hearing Arguments On Conscience Rights For Marriage Commissioners
Regina lawyer Mike Megaw was appointed by the government to argue in favor of the constitutionality of the law. Eighteen other individuals and groups were allowed to intervene in the case. Yesterday the court heard six hours of argument, and returns today to hear the remaining presentations. Some of the arguments yesterday focused on the breadth of the proposed law. It is not limited to same-sex marriage, and some claim that it could allow refusals on religious grounds to perform interracial marriages or marriages between people of different castes as well. (See prior related posting.)
Malaysian Woman Challenges Ban On Non-Muslim Lawyers Practicing In Syariah Court
Vermont Catholic Diocese Settles All Past Clergy Abuse Lawsuits For Over $20M
Debate Over Permitting Stores To Open On Holidays Becomes Contentious
11th Circuit: Muslim's Employment Discrimination Claim Not Supported
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Two Clergy Sexual Abuse Cases Filed In Florida
Anonymous Letter Claims To Be From Veteran Who Stole Sunrise Rock Cross
[Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]5. The cross was erected illegally on public land in 1998 by a private individual named Henry Sandoz. Since then the government has actively worked to promote the continued existence of the cross, even as it excluded other monuments from differing religions. This favoritism and exclusion clearly violates the establishment clause of the US Constitution.
6. Anthony Kennedy desecrated and marginalized the memory and sacrifice of all those non-Christians that died in WWI when he wrote: 'Here one Latin cross in the desert evokes far more than religion. It evokes thousands of small crosses in foreign fields marking the graves of Americans who fell in battles — battles whose tragedies are compounded if the fallen are forgotten.' The irony and tragedy of that statement is unique.
7. Justice Kennedy’s words in particular and others like them from the other Justices caused me to act.
8. At the time of its removal there was nothing to identify the cross as a memorial of any kind, and the simple fact of the matter is that the only thing it represented was an oddly placed tribute to Christ. This cross evoked nothing of the sort that Justice Kennedy writes of, it was in the end simply a cross in the desert....12. We as a nation need to change the dialogue and stop pretending that this is about a war memorial. If it is a memorial, then we need to stop arguing about the cross and instead place a proper memorial on that site, one that respects Christians and non-Christians alike, and one that is actually recognizable as a war memorial.
13. If an appropriate and permanent non-sectarian memorial is placed at the site the cross will be immediately returned to Mr. Sandoz.
14. Alternatively, if a place can be found that memorializes the Christian Veterans of WWI that is not on public land the Cross will promptly be forwarded with care and reverence for installation at the private site.
UPDATE: The May 16 San Bernadino Sun reports that rewards for return of the stolen cross now total $125,000.
Remedies Imposed In Muslim Charity's Challenge To Terrorist Designation
As to the failure to give notice and opportunity to be heard, the court imposed as a remedy a remand. The court will hold an ex parte, in camera meeting with the government to decide what classified evidence will give KindHearts adequate notice. It also remanded to the Office of Foreign Asset Control for further consideration the issue of payment of attorneys' fees from blocked assets. IPS reports on the decision.