Saudi Plaintiffs Say Their Government Is Violating Islamic Law

In Saudi Arabia, two separate lawsuits have recently been filed by Islamic conservatives challenging actions by the Saudi government as being inconsistent with Shariah. Zawya reports today that a member of the public has filed a complaint with the Prosecution and Investigation Commission in Asir province claiming that TV channels and print media affiliated with the Ministry of Culture are advocating the mixing of genders and the unveiling of women, as well as mocking religious symbols. Under a 2005 Royal Decree, the Commission has discretion to accept or reject the complaint.

Meanwhile according to Arab News earlier this week, Sheikh Youssef Al-Ahmad, a lecturer at Imam Muhammad bin Saud Islamic University, has filed a suit in the Court of Appeals in Riyadh challenging a decision by Noura Al-Faiz, deputy minister of education, to allow female teachers in private girls schools to teach boys in the first three grades. Al-Ahmed says this is forbidden "because this is a realization of the liberal scheme to gradually normalize the mixing of genders in schools."

Court Invalidates Arrangement With Jehovah's Witnesses On Orders For Blood Transfusions

In San Joaquin County Human Services Agency v. Marcus W., (CA App., June 2, 2010), a California appellate court essentially invalidated an arrangement that the County Human Services Agency had made over a decade ago with a Jehovah's Witnesses organization. Under the arrangement, doctors seeking court orders for blood transfusions for minor children of Jehovah's Witnesses could obtain a hearing and an order without the stigma of filing a dependency petition which implies parental abuse or neglect. According to the court, the arrangement, while well-intended, is illegal. California's Welfare and Institutions Code, Sec. 369, gives the juvenile court jurisdiction to order medical care for a minor only if the minor has been taken into temporary custody or is a dependent of the court or is named in a petition to be declared a dependent. The court concluded that the juvenile court lacked jurisdiction to enter an order requiring a 16-year old suffering from sickle cell anemia to undergo periodic blood transfusions in violation of his religious beliefs. Yesterday's Los Angeles Metropolitan News-Enterprise reports on the decision.

Joining Religious Commune Does Not Excuse Support Payments

In Shippen v. Shippen, (NC App., May 18, 2010), a North Carolina appellate court upheld a contempt finding against a husband who failed to pay child support and post-separation support to his wife. Shortly after the court ordered the support payments, husband John Lee Shippen joined the Twelve Tribes of Israel, a religious commune that prohibits its members from earning outside income. The court concluded that the fact the defendant's religious beliefs may be sincerely held is irrelevant to his obligation to pay alimony and support. Courthouse News Service today reports on the decision.

9th Circuit Re-Certifies Issues To California High Court In Boy Scout Case

In a case with a complicated procedural history, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has once again certified three questions of state constitutional law to the California Supreme Court in a case challenging leasing (at nominal or no rent) of camp ground and aquatic center space by the city of San Diego, California to the Boy Scouts. Plaintiffs object to the Scouts' exclusion of atheists, agnostics and homosexuals as volunteers or members. The 9th Circuit hopes that resolution of the state law issues will prevent its having to decide the federal Establishment Clause claim raised by plaintiffs. In Barnes-Wallace v. Boy Scouts of America, (9th Cir., June 3, 2010), the court recounts this history:

We previously certified these questions to the California Supreme Court in an order that ... determined that the plaintiffs had standing to maintain this action.... We stayed our certification order pending disposition of a petition for rehearing en banc. That petition was denied ... and we directed the certification order to be delivered to the California Supreme Court.... The Boy Scout defendants filed a petition for certiorari, however, challenging our certification order's ruling that the plaintiffs had standing.... The Supreme Court of California then entered an order stating that our request for decision of certified questions was "denied without prejudice and may be re-filed after the issue of standing is finalized."

...[W]e stayed further proceedings in our court pending the decision of the Supreme Court on the Boy Scouts’ petition for certiorari, and the decision of the Supreme Court in Salazar v. Buono ... which raised a similar standing issue.

On April 28, 2010, the United States Supreme Court decided Salazar v. Buono, ... but a majority of the Court did not decide the relevant standing issue.... Shortly thereafter, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in Boy Scouts v. Barnes-Wallace....

We conclude, therefore, that the issue of standing has become finalized within the meaning of the order of the California Supreme Court.... In accordance with that order, we take this opportunity to re-file our certification of issues and request for decision by the California Supreme Court.

The questions certified to the California Supreme Court are:

1. Do the leases interfere with the free exercise and enjoyment of religion by granting preference for a religious organization in violation of the No Preference Clause in article I, section 4 of the California Constitution?

2. Are the leases "aid" for purposes of the No Aid Clause of article XVI, section 5 of the California Constitution?

3. If the leases are aid, are they benefitting a “creed” or “sectarian purpose” in violation of the No Aid Clause?

Courthouse News Service reports on the 9th Circuit's action.

Judge Orders Observance of Religious Rules In Custody Decision

Yesterday's Jewish Chronicle reports on an unusual order in a bitter custody battle over their 7-year old son between Elina Margolina, an Orthodox Jew, and her former husband, Nelson Derbigney who is now remarried to an Hispanic Catholic woman. Elina complained that her former husband was ruining their son's religious upbringing. She alleged he fed him a non-kosher hot dog and mocked the kippah (skull cap) he wore. So a Chicago judge ordered Nelson and his new wife, Laura, to follow Sabbath rules by not to driving on Saturdays when they had visitation rights, and to cook the boy only kosher food. The judge also stipulated where the Derbigney's could shop for kosher food and required that they have the boy wear a kippah to school. Nelson claims that his ex-wife was a Reform Jew and only became religiously observant after they divorced three years ago.

Pakistan Ratifies Convention on Civil and Political Rights

Pakistan's president, Asif Ali Zardari has signed the Instrument of Ratification for the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the Convention Against Torture, according to the Associated Press of Pakistan yesterday. The instruments of ratification will now be deposited with the United Nations. The ICCPR includes protections for freedom of religion, thought and conscience, including the right to adopt a religion of one's choice.

Summum's Establishment Clause Claim Is Rejected

Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a freedom of expression claim brought by Summum that was refused permission to put up a Seven Aphorism's monument in a park in Pleasant Grove City, Utah. The park already contained a number of other monuments, including the Ten Commandments. (See prior posting.) Subsequently a Utah federal district court permitted Summum to amend its complaint to add an Establishment Clause claim. Now in Summum v. Pleasant Grove City, (D UT, June 3, 2010), the district court dismissed the Establishment Clause challenge finding no constitutional violation. It concluded that the Ten Commandments monument had been displayed for historical, not religious reasons. Also, the city has not shown a preference for one religion over another since, at the time it rejected the proposed Seven Aphorisms monument, government officials had no information about Summum's religious beliefs, practices or teachings. Having rejected the federal Establishment Clause challenge, the court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over a similar state Constitutional claim. Yesterday's Salt Lake Tribune reported on the decision.

Challenge To Agreement For Church Tent City Dismissed As Untimely

In Mercer Island Citizens for Fair Process v. Tent City 4, (WA App., June 1, 2010), a Washington state appellate court dismissed as untimely challenges to a decision by the Mercer Island City Council to to enter a Temporary Use Agreement permitting the Mercer Island United Methodist Church to host a temporary encampment for the homeless in 2008. The court held that the Temporary Use Agreement was a land use decision. Under the state's Land Use Petition Act, any challenge to City Council's decision had to be appealed to the courts within 21 days after it was issued. That time limit also applies to due process challenges to the land use decision. (See prior related posting.)

Russian Taxi Company Caters To Orthodox Christians

In Russia, some are criticizing a new taxi cab company in Moscow that caters to Orthodox Christian believers. Today's Moscow Times reports that Moskovskaya Troika which began on Palm Sunday now operates 50 privately owned taxis driven by devout Russian Orthodox believers. The taxis carry pre-recorded services from the Orthodox Radonezh radio station and literature from the Russian Orthodox Church. The company distributes leaflets inside churches, and much of its business is from riders going to church. Even though Russia's Labor Code bars religious discrimination in hiring, the company requires drivers to be baptized Orthodox.

House Hearing Explores Impact of Money Laundering Rules On Legitimate Charities

On May 26, the U.S. House Financial Services Committee's Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held a hearing on "Anti-Money Laundering: Blocking Terrorist Financing and Its Impact on Lawful Charities." (Links to prepared testimony and webcast of hearing.) Daniel L. Glaser, Deputy Assistant Treasury Secretary testified in part:

Terrorist organizations have abused and exploited charities of all backgrounds. And there is no doubt that terrorist organizations such as al Qaida, Hamas, and Hizbollah have abused and exploited Muslim charities. Though Treasury actions with respect Muslim charities have been relatively infrequent and none have occurred for almost three years, we understand that the important steps that we have taken to target charities that do support terrorist organizations, combined with other successful counter-terrorism efforts across our government, have had the unfortunate and unintended consequence of causing a chilling effect on well-intentioned donor activity within Muslim American communities.

Other witnesses were Kay Guinane, Program Manager, Charity and Security Network; Michael German, Policy Counsel, American Civil Liberties Union; and Matthew Levitt, Director, Stein Program on Counterterrorism and Intelligence, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

Supreme Court: Miranda Rights Waived In Answers About Religious Belief and Prayer

Earlier this week in Berghuis v. Thompkins, (Sup. Ct., June 1, 2010), the U.S. Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision made it easier for police to obtain a waiver of Miranda rights by suspects being questioned. The majority opinion, written by Justice Kennedy, held that police can continue questioning a suspect until he clearly invokes his right to remain silent. Furthermore, when questioning continues after a Miranda warning has been given and understood, the accused's later uncoerced statement implies a waiver of his right to remain silent. The uncoerced statement in this case was a response by the accused to questions about his belief in God. Here is Justice Kennedy's account:

About 2 hours and 45 minutes into the interrogation, [Police Detective] Helgert asked Thompkins, "Do you believe in God?" .... Thompkins made eye contact with Helgert and said "Yes," as his eyes "well[ed] up with tears." ... "Do you pray to God?" Thompkins said "Yes." ... Helgert asked, "Do you pray to God to forgive you for shooting that boy down?" ... Thompkins answered "Yes" and looked away.... Thompkins refused to make a written confession, and the interrogation ended about 15 minutes later.

Yesterday's Detroit Free Press reported on the Court's decision.

Catholic Military Archbishop Issues Statement Opposing Repeal of "Don't Ask/ Don't Tell"

Congress moves closer to enacting a repeal of the military's "Don't Ask/ Don't Tell" policy that precludes service by openly gay and lesbian recruits. (Fox News, 5/28). Catholic Online today reprints a statement from Catholic Archbishop Timothy Broglio, Archbishop for the Military Services in the United States of America, opposing repeal of the current policy. He says in part:

Catholic chaplains must show compassion for persons with a homosexual orientation, but can never condone-even silently-homosexual behavior. A change might have a negative effect on the role of the chaplain not only in the pulpit, but also in the classroom, in the barracks, and in the office.

A more fundamental question, however, should be raised. What exactly is the meaning of a change? No one can deny that persons with a homosexual orientation are already in the military. Does the proposed change authorize these individuals to engage in activities considered immoral not only by the Catholic Church, but also by many other religious groups? Will there be changes in the living conditions, especially in the AOR?

There is no doubt that morality and the corresponding good moral decisions have an effect on unit cohesion and the overall morale of the troops and effectiveness of the mission. This Archdiocese exists to serve those who serve and it assists them by advocating moral behavior. The military must find ways to promote that behavior and develop strong prohibitions against any immoral activity that would jeopardize morale, good morals, unit cohesion and every other factor that weakens the mission. So also must a firm effort be made to avoid any injustices that may inadvertently develop because individuals or groups are put in living situations that are an affront to good common sense.

Presidential Proclamation Declares LGBT Pride Month; Conservative Christians Object

Last week, President Barack Obama issued a Proclamation (full text) declaring June 2010 as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month. According to Baptist Press yesterday, critics, such as Southern Baptist spokesman Bob Stith, charge that the Proclamation marginalizes the beliefs of conservative Christians. Stith also says: " Some of the most joyful, Christ-like Christians I know are those who've walked out of homosexuality." The Presidential Proclamation celebrates the expansion of federal hate crimes laws and proposals to bar sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination in core housing programs. It calls for additional reforms:

Much work remains to fulfill our Nation's promise of equal justice under law for LGBT Americans. That is why we must give committed gay couples the same rights and responsibilities afforded to any married couple, and repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. We must protect the rights of LGBT families by securing their adoption rights, ending employment discrimination against LGBT Americans, and ensuring Federal employees receive equal benefits. We must create safer schools so all our children may learn in a supportive environment. I am also committed to ending "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" so patriotic LGBT Americans can serve openly in our military, and I am working with the Congress and our military leadership to accomplish that goal.

Afghanistan Suspends Operations of Two NGO's on Proselytizing Charges

In Afghanistan, the government has ordered two NGO's-- Norwegian Church Aid and Church World Service-- to temporarily suspend their activities while charges that they proselytized Muslims are investigated by the National Security and Interior Ministries. IRIN and BosNewsLife today report that the charges grow out of videos aired by the privately owned Noorin TV allegedly showing several Afghan men converting to Christianity. Several hundred students at Kabul University yesterday demonstrated against the NGO's. The NGO's have denied the charges, and ACBAR, a consortium of NGO's, has filed a complaint with the Ministry of Economy (MOE) accusing Noorin TV of spreading negative propaganda about NGO's. Sediq Amarkhil, an MOE spokesman, says the TV channel has created the controversy for political gain, but that the NGO's licenses will be revoked, and possibly their officials will be punished, if the charges are found to be accurate. MOE has also set up a Commission with representatives from several Ministries to decide what to do as to the TV station if its charges turn out to be false.

Preliminary Injunction Sought In Challenge To Santa Rosa County Consent Decree

This past week end, Liberty Counsel filed a motion for a preliminary injunction (full text) in Allen v. School Board for Santa Rosa County, Florida, (ND FL, filed 5/30/2010). The lawsuit, filed last month, seeks to enjoin the Santa Rosa school board and superintendent from enforcing a consent decree they entered last year barring various religious practices in the schools. (See prior posting.) In the lawsuit, parents, teachers and students claim that the consent decree violates their First Amendment rights, and that it is now unenforceable because the original plaintiffs have graduated high school. According to yesterday's Northwest Florida Daily News, the motion for a preliminary injunction was filed now because the end of the school year and baccalaureate is approaching. One of the provisions of the consent decree bars the schools from sponsoring religious baccalaureate services. (See prior posting.) The motion seeks to enjoin enforcement of the consent decree pending a ruling on the request for a permanent injunction.

Another Lawsuit In Battle Between Neighboring Hasidic Synagogues

The long-running battle between two Hasidic synagogues in the town of Kiryas Joel, New York, has generated yet another lawsuit. Opponents of the village's chief rabbi had for 25 years been using the former living quarters of the chief rabbi (next to the main synagogue) as their own place of worship, operating under the name Bais Yoel Ohel Feige. However the main synagogue, Congregation Yetev Lev D'Satmar, convinced a state court last fall that the the dissidents' use of the former home as a place of worship requires a site plan review by the Village Zoning Board. (See prior posting.) The group finally stopped using the house in December after a state court judge threatened to jail their leaders for contempt. The group applied to the Zoning Board in February for approval to move back into the building. Yesterday's Hudson Valley Times Herald-Record reports that when the Village Zoning Board finally convened in April to consider the application, the Zoning Board members said nothing. Only lawyers and the village administrator spoke during the 90 minute meeting.

Now Bais Yoel Ohel Feige has filed a lawsuit claiming that the Zoning Board is improperly constituted. Zoning Board members also serve on the village Planning Board in violation of a federal court order barring village residents from serving on more than one village board at the same time. The lawsuit claims that since the village lacks a duly constituted Zoning Board, the court should hear the application to reopen the synagogue. Bais Yoel Ohel Feige argues further that use of the house as a synagogue is part of a broader 1975 approval of the site's use by the Town of Monroe.

Ahmadi Spokesman Says Pakistan Must Repeal Its Blasphemy Laws; USCIRF Agrees

Yesterday's Washington Post carries an op-ed by Nasim Rehmatullah, National Vice President of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, USA, decrying the terror campaign in Pakistan against Ahmadis. Last week an extremist attack against two Ahmadi mosques killed at least 80 people. (Washington Post.) Ahmadis consider themselves Muslim, but Pakistan's Constitution classifies them as non-Muslim, while a Pakistani law enacted in 1984 prohibits Ahmadis from building mosques or publicly declaring their faith. Rehmatullah writes: "the battle against Pakistan's extremists cannot be won unless all levels of government in Pakistan scrutinize and reform the laws and policies that give ammunition to these extremists. It is simply not enough to apprehend and uproot extreme groups ... without first addressing the root problem. America must push Pakistan's Parliament to repeal the anti-blasphemy laws in order to dismantle the extremist apparatus that endangers the world." (See prior related posting.)

Last Friday, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom issued a release condemning the attacks against the Ahmadi mosques in Pakistan and calling for repeal of Pakistan's blasphemy laws. USCIRF said it

has documented systematic, ongoing, and egregious violations of freedom of religion in Pakistan for several years. Sectarian and religiously-motivated violence is chronic, and the government has failed to protect members of religious minorities from such violence and to bring perpetrators to justice. Religiously discriminatory legislation, such as anti-Ahmadi laws and the blasphemy law, foster an atmosphere of intolerance in the country and embolden extremists.

Court Issues TRO So Boy Can Wear Rosary To School

As it had previously threatened to do (see prior posting), yesterday the American Center for Law & Justice filed suit in a New York federal district court on behalf of a 13-year old middle school student in Schenectady, New York who was suspended for wearing a rosary outside his shirt to school. The school argued that items made of beads are gang-related. The complaint (full text) in R.H. v. Schenectady City School District, (ND NY, filed 6/1/2010), contended that the student's suspension violated his free speech and expression and free exercise rights. It also claims that the school's dress code is impermissibly vague. A few hours after the lawsuit was filed, the court issued a temporary restraining order (full text of TRO) barring school officials from preventing plaintiff from attending school while wearing a rosary outside his shirt. (ACLJ Press Release.) The ACLJ memorandum in support of the application for a TRO is also available online. Yesterday's Christian Post also reports on the TRO.

UPDATE: On June 9, the court issued an order (full text) consented to by both parties extending the TRO until September 10 while the parties work to resolve the matter over the summer. A hearing on plaintiff's motion for a temporary injunction was set for June 11.

Massachusetts Towns Taxing Closed Catholic Churches

Yesterday's Boston Globe reported that nine cities and towns around Massachusetts have forced the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Boston to pay property taxes on closed churches, schools, convents, and parish halls. Tax assessors say that church property is exempt only if it is being actively used by the owner for religious purposes. These moves come as both cities and the Archdiocese face tight financial times. Churches in Scituate and Framingham being taxed have been occupied for years by former parishioners who object to their closing. Cities say that when the vigils are not approved by the Church, the building has lost its tax exemption. Estimating the value of church property can also be a difficult task. (See prior related posting.)

Australian State's Proposed New Curriculum Includes Creationism In History Course

In the Australian state of Queensland, a draft national curriculum scheduled to be introduced next year includes teaching about the controversy over creationism as part of the ancient history course. The Port Melbourne Herald Sun reported Sunday reports that the curriculum asks students to develop their historical skills in an "investigation of a controversial issue" such as "human origins (eg, Darwin's theory of evolution and its critics)." The draft curriculum is still open for comment by teachers. Kay Bishop, head of the Queensland History Teachers Association, said the curriculum opens opens opportunities for debate and critical thinking, and is not designed to press a particular view. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]