Adjunct Prof of Catholic Thought Fired Over E-Mail On Homosexuality and Natural Law

Fox News reported Friday that the University of Illinois, Champaign, has fired an adjunct professor who taught courses on Introduction to Catholicism and Modern Catholic Thought because of an e-mail he sent to a student explaining the Catholic position on homosexuality. The professor, Ken Howell, who also then lost his job at an on-campus Catholic center, was not renewed at the end of Spring Semester after a student complained that an e-mail Howell sent to his students preparing for exams amounted to hate speech. Howell wrote: "Natural Moral Law says that Morality must be a response to REALITY. In other words, sexual acts are only appropriate for people who are complementary, not the same." Howell has taught at the University for nine years. He says he makes it clear to his students that he believes the Church views he teaches, but that students will not be graded on the basis of whether they believe them. The University said that Howell's e-mail violates the University's standards of inclusivity.

Recent Articles Of Interest

From SSRN:

• David Gan-wing Cheng, Wisconsin v. Yoder: Respecting Children’s Rights and Why Yoder Would Soon Be Overturned, (July 7, 2010).
• Katherine Biber, Bad Holocaust Art, (Law Text, Vol.13, pp. 226-259, 2009).
• Samuel D. Brunson, Rethinking Public Charities and Political Speech, (Loyola University Chicago School of Law Research Paper No. 2010-002, April 7, 2010).

From SmartCILP:

• Irus Braverman, Planting the Promised Landscape: Zionism, Nature, and Resistance in Israel/Palestine, 49 Natural Resources Journal 317-365 (2009).
• Holmes Rolston III, Saving Creation: Faith Shaping Environmental Policy, 4 Harvard Law & Policy Review 121-148 (2010).

Economic Collusion Leads To Price Spike In Saudi Arabia Before Ramadan

Ramadan begins this year on Aug. 10. Zawya today reports that in Saudi Arabia, where the weeks preceding the holy month are a high shopping season, prices on foodstuffs-- especially imports-- are increasing sharply because or collusion by two companies. The two companies, taking advantage of favorable exchange rates, have bought up huge stocks of food items from the sole agent for many imported food products. They now monopolize local food distribution networks. Prices for essential commodities have risen 25% in recent weeks, and this could double by the time Ramadan begins.

Prayer At South Carolina County Council Meetings Becomes Controversial

Today's Spartanburg, South Carolina Herald Journal reports on the controversy over prayer at Spartanburg County Council meetings. The Council's chaplain-- Jerry Clevenger, a Sheriff's Office employee-- usually closes invocations by invoking Jesus' name. However, apparently the prayer policy provoked scrutiny when in March Councilman O'Neal Mintz filled in for the chaplain at one meeting and delivered a prayer condemning abortion and same-sex marriage. Now Unitarian minister Don Rollins is organizing a "silent protest" against opening meetings with Christian prayer, seeking to have prayers delivered by members of different faith communities. Council chairman Jeff Horton says that as a Christian he could not ask anyone not to pray in Jesus' name.

British Court Says Town Wrong In Suspending Foster Care License After Religious Conversion

In Britain, a High Court has forced the Council in the town of Gateshead to admit that it acted improperly in revoking the foster care license of a Christian woman. According to a release today by the Christian Institute, the Gateshead Council in 2008 deregistered the woman, who had been caring for foster children for ten years, preventing her from continuing to do so after a a 16-year old Muslim girl in her charge converted to Christianity. Lawyers for the woman argued that the Council's action failed to take account of the girl's freedom of religion. The license revocation has had a significant impact on the foster carer's financial situation.

Recent Prisoner Free Excercise Cases

In Penwell v. Holtgeerts, (9th Cir., July 7, 2010), the 9th Circuit remanded to the district court a claim that restrictions on an inmate's religious practice burdened his free exercise rights. The 9th Circuit had announced a new standard for determining this issue in another case subsequent to the district court's decision.

In Lewis v. Ryan, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65258 (D AZ, June 9, 2010), an Arizona federal district court dismissed with leave to amend a prisoner's claim that his free exercise rights were violated when authorities denied his request for his retention funds to be used for a donation to a religious charity. He alleged his religion requires him to practice charity.

In Duran v. Patrick, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65616 (D MA, June 30, 2010), a Massachusetts federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65746, June 9, 2010) and dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies an inmate's claim that a corrections officer destroyed and disposed of his religious articles to prevent him from practicing his Islamic faith.

In Taylor v. Pelican Bay, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65996 (ND CA, July 1, 2010), a California federal district court rejected an inmate's claim that his free exercise rights were violated by a requirement that he identify his religion in order for the prison chaplain to verify his claim to need a religious diet. It also rejected his religious freedom claims based on occasional failures of his meal trays to include all items that should have been on the religious diet tray.

In Davis v. Flores, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66691 (ED CA, July 1, 2010), a California federal district court refused to grant summary judgment to an inmate who complained that his rights under the free exercise clause and RLUIPA were violated by restrictions for a period of time on Muslim prisoners purchasing or possessing prayer oil and by suspension of religious services after the dismissal of a chaplain who had smuggled in contraband in prayer oil containers.

In Castle v. Hedgpeth, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66514 (ED CA, June 30, 2010), a California federal magistrate judge recommended that an inmate be permitted to proceed with his challenge to enforcement of a prison regulation that prohibits Muslim inmates from purchasing or possessing prayer oil.

In Allen v. Jones, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67207 (WD LA, July 6, 2010), a Louisiana federal district judge adopted the recommendations of a magistrate (2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67247, May
7, 2010) and rejected plaintiff's claim that the Establishment Clause was violated by a policy that required inmates who left their cells during church call out to attend church services.

In Rider v. Yates, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67612 (ED CA, June 15, 2010), a California federal magistrate judge permitted an inmate to move ahead with his claim that prison officials took a chalice that he had on a pagan altar in his cell, depriving him of the property in violation of his rights under the 1st Amendment and RLUIPA.

Suit Challenges Georgia Ban On Concealed Carry of Guns In Churches

Yesterday's Atlanta Journal Constitution reports that a gun rights group, its president, a Thomsaston (GA) Baptist church and its minister have filed suit in state court challenging Georgia's ban on carrying concealed weapons in churches. The complaint (full text) in Georgiacarry.org, Inc. v. State of Georgia, (GA Super. Ct., filed 7/7/2010), alleges that the ban interferes with the free exercise of religion by barring in places of worship activities generally permitted throughout the state. It also alleges that the ban infringes rights under the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The suit follows the U.S. Supreme Court's decision last month in McDonald v. Chicago, holding that the Second Amendment's individual right to keep and bear arms for self defense (subject to reasonable regulation) applies to the states as well as the federal government.

Commercial Use of Part of Religious High School Not Protected By RLUIPA

In New Life Worship Center v. Town of Smithfield Zoning Board of Review, 2010 R.I. Super. LEXIS 101 (RI Super. Ct., July 7, 2010), a Rhode Island trial court upheld the decision of a town zoning board to bar use of space in a high school operated by New Life Worship Center, a religious organization, for use as a commercial fitness center and dance studio. The court rejected New Life's claims under RLUIPA and Rhode Island's Religious Freedom Restoration Act that denial of a special use permit improperly created a substantial burden on the organization's exercise of religion. The court said in part:

The inability of New Life to operate the fitness center and dance studio as a commercial business to generate funds to support the parish and the building of the high school does not pose any significant pressure on the members of New Life. The members of the church are not being asked to conform their behavior in practicing their religion, nor are the religious activities of the church being compromised.... [T]he denial of the special use permit to protect the students of the high school from the regular entry into the building by members of the general public is a compelling governmental interest. The Zoning Board is not denying New Life the opportunity to practice ancillary activities on the property, but rather disallowing open access to the high school building in fear of the potential danger to the students.

Court Rules National Episcopal Church Entitled To Property of Break-Away Georgia Parish

In Rector, Wardens and Vestrymen of Christ Church in Savannah v. Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Georgia, Inc., (GA Ct. App., July 8, 2010), a Georgia appellate court, applying neutral principles of civil law, held that the National Episcopal Church is entitled to the property of a local parish (Savannah's Christ Church) that disaffiliated and joined the more conservative Anglican Church of North America. The court concluded that Christ Church has made itself subject to the discipline and canons of the National Episcopal Church which impose a trust on parish property in favor of the National Episcopal Church and the Diocese of Georgia. The Savannah Morning News reported on the decision. [Thanks to John Chilton for the lead.]

5th Circuit: Texas RFRA Supports Long Braids In School For Native American Boy

In A.A. v. Needville Independent School District, (5th Cir., July 9, 2010), the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 decision, held that the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act protects the right of a Native American kindergartner to wear his hair in two long braids. The majority held that the school’s proposed alternatives that the boy either wear his hair in a single braid tucked into his shirt or in a bun on top of his head were insufficient and offend a sincere religious belief held by the boy and his family.

Judge Jolly dissenting argued that the only religious requirement the boy put forward was that he must be allowed to wear his hair uncut, and the alternatives proposed by the school allowed him to do so. The added requirement that his long hair be visible, argued Judge Jolly, was “confected” by the majority “entirely on its own.” (See prior related posting.) [Thanks to Eugene Volokh via Religionlaw for the lead.]

New Louisiana Law Gives Churches Option To Permit Concealed Carry of Handguns

ABP reports that on July 6 Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal signed into law HB 1272 which repeals the total ban on carrying concealed handguns in churches and other houses of worship. Instead the new law which will take effect next month permits congregations to authorize those who hold valid concealed carry permits to bring their weapons into the church, synagogue or mosque. However the congregation must mandate an additional 8 hours of tactical training for anyone who will bring in a concealed handgun. The new law also provides that if the congregation authorizes concealed carry, the pastor, priest, minister or other authority must inform the congregation. This provision presumably has two interesting effects. First it requires that everyone in the congregation know that others may be armed. Second, because the law provides that the decision to permit concealed carry is to be made by the "entity which ... has authority over the administration of a church, synagogue or mosque," the law presumably requires that when a congregational board of trustees approves, a dissenting clergyman may not refuse to publicize the action.

Author Argues That Advocacy For Gay Rights Is A Religious Issue

While most of the public discussion of gay rights by religious leaders has come from those who believe the expansion of rights for same-sex couples threaten their religious liberty to oppose homosexual conduct, in the current issue of Tikkun Magazine, Jay Michaelson argues that support of LGBT rights is a religious mandate. His article Ten Reasons Why Gay Rights Is a Religious Issue, contends in part that "anti-gay forces are misrepresenting what the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament say, and thus distorting the word of God. This should be of concern to all religionists.... Gay rights is a religious issue because its use as a political wedge issue has distorted church teaching and politicized religion."

California Episcopal Diocese Sues Another Break-Away Parish

The Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin, California, continues to file lawsuits to reclaim property of break-away parishes. Episcopal Life reported today that the diocese has filed suit in state court against St. Paul's Anglican Church in Visalia, one of the 40 congregations that broke away to affiliate with the more conservative Province of the Southern Cone. The break-away parish is now affiliated with the Anglican Church in North America. The suit was filed after parish members refused to negotiate a return of the properties to the Episcopal Church. The diocese has previously sued four other break-away parishes as well as former bishop, John-David Schofield. (See prior posting.).

Russian Art Museum Curators On Trial For Inciting Religious Hatred

In Russia, the trial of two curators of the Sakharov Museum is coming to an end, and defendants are facing a sentence of up to three years in prison on charges of inciting religious hatred. AP yesterday reported that the charges stem from a 2007 "Forbidden Art" exhibit designed to display works of art that had been banned from major museums in 2006. Among the works of art were several paintings of Jesus. In one, Jesus' disciples were depicted as Mickey Mouse; in another, the crucified Jesus' head was replaced by the Order of Lenin medal. The exhibit closed a few days after it opened when a group of altar boys defaced a number of paintings. The Russian Orthodox Church and religious ultra-nationalist groups pressed prosecutors to file charges against the curators.

Village May Not Charge For Legal Advice To Zoning Applicant

According to today's Hudson Valley Times Herald-Record, a New York state trial court judge has ruled that the village of South Blooming Grove (NY) may not charge a Hasidic Jewish group for legal advice given to it by the village's special counsel about the group's application for zoning approval for use of former resort property in the village. (See prior posting.) The village charged the group $13,000 for past advice, and required another $7500 to continue reviewing its site plan. The group wants to open a yeshiva on former Lake Anne resort property club house. The village opposes the move, arguing in a counter-suit that the resort property is improperly subdivided.

29 State AG's File Amicus Brief Supporting National Day of Prayer

Yesterday, 29 state attorneys general joined together in filing an amicus brief (full text) with the 7th Circuit urging it to find that the National Day of Prayer does not violate the Establishment Clause. In a press release, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott who led the effort said that the district court decision striking down the Day of Prayer statute (see prior posting) also threatens Memorial Day because federal law requests the President to issue a proclamation each year calling on people to use the day to pray for peace. The brief argues that private prayer contemplated by the National Day of Prayer statute is less intrusive than public prayers routinely offered by each branch of the federal government and that there is a long history of prayer proclamations in this country, both at the federal and state levels.

UPDATE: On July 8, sixty-seven members of the US House of Representatives also filed an amicus brief (full text) seeking reversal of the trial court's decision. (ACLJ Release.)

Massachusetts Federal District Court Strikes Down DOMA

In two companion cases today, a Massachusetts federal district judge held Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (1 USC Sec. 7) unconstitutional. That section provides that in interpreting any federal statute or regulation, "the word 'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word 'spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife."

Gill v. Office of Personnel Management, (D MA, July 8, 2010), is a suit brought by same-sex couples and survivors of deceased same-sex spouses who were denied various federal marriage-based benefits available to heterosexual couples. The court held that DOMA violates the equal protection clause. It held that it need not decide whether to apply strict scrutiny because the statute lacks a rational basis to support it. In the court's view: "Congress undertook this classification for the one purpose that lies entirely outside of legislative bounds, to disadvantage a group of which it disapproves."

Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, (D MA, July 8, 2010), was brought by Massachusetts-- which recognizes same-sex marriage-- contending that DOMA violates the 10th Amendment by intruding on areas of exclusive state authority. It also argued that the law exceeds Congress' Spending Clause powers by forcing the state to discriminate against its own citizens in order to receive federal funds. The court agreed with the challenge holding that DOMA imposes an unconstitutional condition on the receipt of federal funds, impermissibly interferes with state domestic relations laws, and regulates Massachusetts "as a state," interfering with its ability to structure its traditional functions. The New York Times reports on today's decisions.

Washington State Pharmacy Board Backs Down On Rules In Pre-Trial Compromise

In 2007, the Washington state Board of Pharmacy adopted a rule requiring pharmacists to fill all prescriptions (including Plan B, the "morning after" contraceptive) even if doing so violates their religious beliefs. In July 2009, the 9th Circuit vacated a preliminary injunction that the district court had imposed. It remanded the case directing the district court to apply a rational basis standard in adjudicating pharmacists' free exercise challenge to the rule. (See prior posting.) Now as the case was about to go to trial on remand, the state Board of Pharmacy has backed down and negotiated a compromise. In a stipulation (full text) filed yesterday by the parties in Stormans Inc. v. Selecky, the Board told the court that on June 29 it had begun a rule-making proceeding to adopt an amended rule that would permit facilitated referrals for all pharmacies and pharmacists when they are unable or unwilling to fill a prescription for any reason, including conscientious reasons. PubliCola yesterday reporting on these developments quotes Lisa Stone, Executive Director of Legal Voice , who complained that the state had "pulled the rug out from under our clients." Becket Fund issued a release supporting the new rule making, saying that "Americans should not be forced out of their professions solely because of their religious beliefs...."

Egypt's Constitutional Court Freezes Ruling Requiring Coptic Church To Remarry Divorced Men

ANSAmed and AFP reported yesterday that Egypt's Constitutional Court has imposed a temporary freeze on a controversial ruling issued earlier this year by the country's High Administrative Court. That ruling, handed down in May (see prior posting), required the Coptic Christian Church to allow remarriages of divorced men. Coptic Church head Pope Shenouda III however announced that he would excommunicate any Coptic priest who remarries divorced men in violation of Church law.

11th Circuit Upholds Limits on Feeding Large Groups In Parks

In First Vagabonds Church of God v. City of Orlando, (11th Cir., July 6, 2010), the 11th Circuit, in a 2-1 decision, reversed the district court (see prior posting) and upheld Orlando, Florida's Large Group Feeding Ordinance against a variety of constitutional attacks. The Ordinance requires a permit to feed more than 25 people in any downtown park, and limits a group to two permits per park in a 12 month period. It was challenged by Food Not Bombs, an activist group that feeds the poor, and by a church that holds Sunday services (including the sharing of food) in a downtown city park. The majority held that the feeding activities do not amount to symbolic expression under the First Amendment because a reasonable observer would not see them as communicative. It rejected a Free Exercise challenge, finding the Ordinance to be a neutral law of general applicability that serves a rational basis. It rejected void-for-vagueness and equal protection challenges. Finally it concluded that the law does not violate the Florida Religious Freedom Restoration Act because it does not substantially burden the church's exercise of its religious belief in sharing food during services. Judge Barrett dissented, arguing that the activist group's activities are expressive conduct protected by the First Amendment.