Saudi Clerics Say Muslim Women In France Need Not Wear Veil

As France moves to ban the weraing of the burqa and niqab (see prior posting), Saudi Islamic jurisprudence scholar Mohamed al-Nujaimi and Saudi author and cleric Ayed al-Garni say that Muslim women living in France are exempt from the requirement to cover their face. Apparently so are tourists to France, but the clerics say that it is preferable to avoid visiting there and instead go to Muslim countries which permit the niqab. The two clerics are not members of the Saudi Senior Scholars Auhority which has not commented on France's actions. The comments come as the Louvre Museum in France, with the support of the Saudi government, has mounted a major display of Saudi artifacts. These developments were reported Friday by Reuters via Haaretz.

Recent Articles and Book of Interest

From SSRN:

• Ronald R.Garet, To Secure the Blessings, (USC Law Legal Studies Paper No. 10-11, July 19, 2010).
• Asim Jusic, Legal Regulation of Non-Mainstream Religious Groups: Perspectives from Economics and Social Psychology, (IWM Junior Visiting Fellows' Conferences, Vol. XXVIII, 2010).
• Farrah Ahmed, The Value of Faith, (Religion, State & Society, Forthcoming).
• Sahar F. Aziz, Sticks and Stones, The Words That Hurt: Entrenched Stereotypes Eight Years after 9/11, (New York City Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Alexander Tsesis, Preserving Tolerance While Remaining True to the First Amendment, (Loyola University Chicago School of Law Research Paper No. 2010-008, July 6, 2010).

New Book:

• Ruth Harris, Dreyfus: Politics, Emotion, and the Scandal of the Century, (Metropolitan Books, June 2010), reviewed in the New York Times.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Muhammad v. Sapp, (11th Cir., July 21, 2010), the 11th Circuit denied a Muslim prisoner's objections under RLUIPA to prison authorities requiring him to wear a close-fitting uniform, refusing to let him have a Qibla compass, requiring him to shower in stalls where he could be seen by other inmates and prison officials, refusing to let him to have 16 gold crowns removed from his teeth, and refusing to provide him with a requested diet.

In Fletcher v. Whorton, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71698 (D NV, March 22, 2010), a Nevada federal district court rejected a Wiccan inmate's claim under RLUIPA that his free exercise rights were substantially burdened when a prison refused to construct a sweat lodge for his use and give him access to raw meat for
Wiccan rituals.

In Young v. Smalls, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72061 (SD CA, July 19, 2010), a California federal district court rejected an inmate's request for a kosher diet instead of the "religious vegetarian diet" he was receiving. The court found that plaintiff did not allege his request was tied to a religious belief; instead he thought a kosher meal was more sanitary.

In Giron v. Garcia, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72491 (D NV, July 19, 2010), a federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72490, June 2, 2010) and held that plaintiff had adequately exhausted his administrative remedies in seeking permission to have his prayer blanket.

In Shoucair v. Warren, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72932 (ED MI, July 20, 2010), a Michigan federal district court accepted a magistrate's recommendations (2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72931, May 25, 2010), holding that plaintiff was improperly attempting to force his 8th Amendment claim into a claim under RLUIPA. AT issue was an assault on plaintiff by another inmate because of disagreement between their Muslim and Moorish Science religious groups.

In Wallace v. Miller, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73340 (SD IL, July 20. 2010), an Illinois federal district court denied a preliminary injunction to an inmate who was a Satmar Hasidic Jew, finding that he was unlikely to succeed on the merits in his challenge to various limitations on his ability to practice his religious customs. Various accommodations had already been made, and the other restrictions were reasonable limitations in light of penological interests.

In Howard v. Epps, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72994 (SD MS, July 20, 2010), a Mississippi federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2010 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 73034, March 12, 2010) and dismissed a Rastafarian prisoner's allegations that he was discriminated against because of his dreadlocks and was wrongly informed he could not grow dreadlocks.

In Cotton v. Cate, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73878 (ND CA, July 19, 2010), a California federal district court permitted plaintiff, a member of the Shetaut Neter religion, to proceed with his RLUIPA and equal protection claims alleging that prison authorities failed to furnish him a vegan diet as required by his religious beliefs.

In Scott v. Goodwin, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73610 (WD LA, July 21, 2010), a federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations and dismissed as frivolous a claim by a Muslim prisoner that his First Amendment rights were violated when he was told that he would be confined to his cell for his entire period of imprisonment if he refused to be vaccinated.

In Neal v. Campbell, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74053 (ED CA, July 21,2010), a California federal magistrate judge rejected an inmate's complaint that he was placed in administrative segregation for becoming an "ameer" (a Muslim leader) at the prison, as authorities had previously threatened to do. The court concluded that becoming an ameer was not a central mandate of plaintiff's religion. It also found that defendants have qualified immunity.

DC Circuit OKs "In God We Trust" On U.S. Currency

In a brief opinion last week, the D.C. Circuit in Kidd v. Obama, (DC Cir., July 21, 2010), affirming the district court (see prior posting), held that appellants had not demonstrated that printing the national motto "In God We Trust" on U.S. currency is a violation of the Establishment Clause.

Paper Reports On Growth of Liberty Institute

Today's Dallas Morning News reports on the growth of the Plano, Texas based Liberty Institute since its founding in in 1997. Its budget has increased to $2 million and it has 20 staffers plus volunteer lawyers across the country to help it litigate from a conservative Christian perspective on religious speech, free exercise and other national conservative issues. It became know initially for its litigation to allow students to distribute religious-themed candy cane pens in local schools. (See prior posting.) It also filed suit on behalf of Alaska legislators to attempt to prevent the release of a report that accused former Alaska governor Sarah Palin of abuse of power for her role in the firing of a state trooper. Liberty Institute's president Kelly J. Shackelford sees the group's main target as the ACLU.

High School Will Not Spend Money To Fight ACLU Over Prayer Banner

Fox News yesterday reported that a Cranson, Rhode Island high school will remove or change the wording on a banner that has hung in its auditorium since 1956 rather than spend the amount that would be necessary to fight church-state objections by the ACLU. The banner features a prayer to "Our Heavenly Father" to grant students the desire to do their best, to be good sports and to be kind and honest and know true friendship. The School Committee plans to discuss the matter with the ACLU to see if they can agree on compromise language.

University Police Officer Files Religious Discrimination Complaint With EEOC

Today's Baltimore Sun reports on an EEOC complaint that has been filed by a Towson University Police Force officer claiming religious discrimination. John David Brown, a convert to Orthodox Judaism, refused to work on his Sabbath from sundown Friday to Sundown Saturday. Brown claims that the University has backed off a settlement reached in 2006 and fired him two years ago rather than accommodate his religious beliefs. The University says Brown failed to show up seven times for work on the Sabbath and Jewish holidays on which the force was too thinly staffed to accommodate his request for time off. The University's disciplinary
board says Brown failed to seek voluntary exchange of days with other officers.

Judge's Handling of Juror Objection To Oath Becomes Primary Election Issue

In Port Angeles,Washington, an incumbent judge's handling of an objection by a juror to being sworn in using the phrase "so help me God" has become an issue in this year's primary election. Today's Peninsula Daily News reports that at a voters' forum, Tim Davis, one of the candidates for Clallam County District Court 1 judge, accused one of his opponents, Judge Rick Porter, of embarrassing Gail Smith, a juror in a DUI trial, by insisting that she include the phrase in the oath. Smith wrote a note to the judge during a break in the trial, saying that swearing in the name of God was like swearing in the name of Santa Claus. When the jurors returned from lunch, Judge Porter had Smith called out of the jury room and questioned her on whether her anger at being sworn in would affect her ability to act as a juror. Smith said it would not. In Washington state, use of the phrase is optional. Judge Porter, who only vaguely recalls the incident, says it did not happen the way Davis charges. He says he apologized to Smith, telling her that it was part of the script and that he did not mean to offend her. Smith however insists that she was embarrassed by being called out and having to sit alone in the jury box, with attorneys and others present, while Judge Porter explained.

French Swim Resort Rules Bar "Burkinis"

With a ban on wearing of burqas in public about to see final passage in France (see prior posting), the London Mail today reports that two Muslim women were ordered out of a swimming pool in the southern French city of Port Leucate for wearing "burkinis". These are swim garments that cover the entire body, including a veil over the head. A regional government official said that the action stemmed from a violation of the vacation resort's own rules that require men and women to wear ordinary swim wear for hygienic reasons. Police were called in when the husband of one of the women threatened the pool's lifeguard with a bowling ball. He eventually backed down, and the couples left the pool with no charges being filed. (see prior related posting.)

New California Poll Probes Views On Same Sex Marriage By Religious Affiliation

On Wednesday, the Public Religion Research Institute released a poll examining religous-based attitudes about same-sex marriage among Californians. (Full text of poll report.) (Full text of questions and percentage responses.) Here are some excerpts from the press release's summary of poll findings:

•If another vote similar to Proposition 8 were held tomorrow, a majority (51%) say they would vote to allow gay and lesbian couples to marry....

• There are major religious groups on both sides of the debate.... Solid majorities of Latino Catholics and white mainline Protestants say they would vote to allow gay and lesbian couples to marry, while solid majorities of white evangelical Protestants, Latino Protestants, and African American Protestants say they would vote to keep same-sex marriage illegal.

• An overwhelming majority of Californians, and majorities of all major religious groups except Latino Protestants, say they both favor laws that would protect gay and lesbian people from job discrimination and favor allowing gay and lesbian people to serve openly in the military (75% and 69% respectively). A majority (56%) of Californians favor adoption rights for same-sex couples.

• .... A majority of Latino Catholics (57%) say they would vote to allow gay and lesbian couple to marry, compared to just 22% of Latino Protestants. The Catholic-Protestant divide in the Latino community is evident across a wide range of public policy issues related to gay and lesbian rights.

• In the wider California religious community, there are also significant Catholic-Protestant differences in the frequency with which each group hears about the issue of homosexuality from their clergy. Protestants are significantly more likely to hear about the issue than Catholics.... Mainline Protestants are the only major religious group that is more likely to hear positive than negative messages about homosexuality from their clergy.

• The messages about homosexuality that Californians hear at their place of worship are correlated with their views on same-sex marriage....

Conservative Groups Want A Piece of Oral Argument On National Day of Prayer

In April, the U.S. Justice Department filed an appeal with the 7th Circuit in Freedom from Religion Foundation v. Obama, a case in which the district court held that the statute creating a National Day of Prayer violates the Establishment Clause. (See prior posting.) Now, however, the Family Research Council and the Liberty Institute which filed an amicus brief on behalf of a number of conservative organization yesterday announced that they have also filed a motion for leave to participate in oral argument. The groups contend that the Justice Department's brief does not go far enough in defending the statute. Family Research Council President Tony Perkins said:

The President's attorneys failed to cite any of the key cases that would require immediate dismissal of this lawsuit because the plaintiffs lack standing to bring it. FRC plans to mount a robust defense of this important national event that a liberal judge has attempted to scrub from the public square.

Graduate Student Sues Over Attempt To Impose Remediation Plan To Change Her LGBT Beliefs

A graduate student in the counseling program at Augusta State University in Georgia filed a civil rights lawsuit Wednesday alleging that her free speech, free exercise, equal protection and due process rights were infringed by conditions imposed on her in order for her to remain in the University's program. The complaint (full text) in Keeton v. Anderson-Wiley, (SD GA, filed 7/21/2010), alleges that the school required student Jennifer Keeton to undergo a remediation program because her Christian beliefs regarding homosexuality are inconsistent with counsellor's' code of ethics and with research that shows that sexual orientation is not a lifestyle or choice, but is a state of being. The faculty claimed that Keeton's beliefs reflect an improper professional disposition toward potential gay and transgender clients. Keeton's attorneys also filed a memorandum in support of her motion for a preliminary injunction (full text). Alliance Defense Fund issued a press release announcing the filing of the case.

Florida Church Will Mark 9/11 With Burning of Qurans

Religion News Service reported yesterday that the Dove World Outreach Center, a non-denominational church in Gainesville, Florida, plans to host an "International Burn A Quran Day" on this year's anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. In response to a Facebook posting, people have been mailing Qurans to the church for it to burn. The church's pastor, Terry Jones, author of a book titled "Islam is the Devil," said that protests are a central purpose of his church. He said the goal is to give Muslims an opportunity to convert. This year, Sept. 11 coincides with the Muslim feast of Eid-al-Fitr.

Court Says Temple's Board Failed To Authorize Borrowings

In Brighton Way, LLC v. Queen Esther's Temple, Inc., (NY Sup. Ct., July 9, 2010), a New York trial court dismissed plaintiff's attempt to recover $140,000 allegedly due under a note from Queen Esther's Temple, a religious organization. The note was secured by a mortgage, and in a prior action the court held the mortgage failed to comply with provisions of the New York Not-For-Profit Corporation Law that requires court approval for a religious corporation to mortgage or sell its property. In that proceeding, the court found the entire transaction highly suspect, suggesting that the individual signing the note profited personally. Following that decision, plaintiff commenced an action to confirm the mortgage and note nunc pro tunc. However the court found no evidence that Board of Trustees of Queen Esther's Temple approved the mortgage or note, or authorized it to be signed by the individual purportedly signing as chairman of the board.

Group Asks IRS To Investigate Campaign E-mail By Non-Profit Religious Group

Americans United announced yesterday that it had sent a letter (full text) to the Internal Revenue Service asking it to investgate a non-profit group "Reclaiming Oklahoma for Christ." The 501(c)(3) group distributed an e-mail urging attendance at a June campaign rally for state Rep. Sally Kern who is running for re-election. The e-mail warned that the campaign pitted Kern, "an outspoken Christian, pro-family representative" against "an individual who has had a sex change operation" who was recruited by the "homosexual lobby" to run against Kern. Non-profit groups are precluded by federal tax law from intervening in partisan political campaigns.

Personhood Amendment Favored In Georgia Republican Primary Straw Poll

WTVM News and a press release from Georgia Right To Life report that in Tuesday's primary election in Georgia, the Republican primary ballot in 47 counties included a non-binding vote on a "personhood" amendment to the state constitution. The question read: "Do you support an amendment to the Georgia state constitution so as to provide that the paramount right to life is vested in each human being from the earliest biological beginning until natural death?" In Butts county, the Democratic primary ballot also contained the same question. The measure passed in every county. The lowest support was in DeKalb County (60%), while the highest support was in Jeff Davis County (92%). Georgia Right To Life plans to use the straw poll results to encourage the legislature to place a Personhood constitutional amendment on the ballot in 2012.

AJCongress, Leading Church-State Advocate, Suspends Operations After Financial Losses

Today's New York Jewish Week reports that the American Jewish Congress, an advocacy group known for its expertise on church-state issues, has suspended operations due to financial problems. AJCongress lost $21 million of its $24 million endowment in the 2008 Bernard Madoff Ponzi scheme. (See prior posting.) The AJCongress demise is also blamed on changes made in the 1990's by Jack Rosen, a successful businessman who served as president of the group. JTA reports that some activities by AJCongress continue with staff hoping that the organization is not totally dead. Controversy surrounds the Board's failure to unrestrict remaining funds to pay AJCongress employees before final layoffs last Thursday. (Forward). An op-ed published last week in the Forward traces the long history of AJCongress, including its leading role in supporting church-state separation in Supreme Court litigation. During the 1950's and 1960's, AJCongress' Leo Pfeffer was the pre-eminent church-state litigation strategist nationally for the Jewish community.

Nigerian Lawsuit Claims Ban on Child Marriage Restricts Muslims' Religious Freedom

In Nigeria earlier this month, the National Agency for the Prohibition of Traffic in Persons (NAPTIP) forwarded to the Attorney General for possible prosecution its findings that Ahmed Sani Yerima, former governor of Zamfara state and a member of the Nigerian Senate, violated the Nigerian Child Rights Act of 2003 when he married a 13-year old Egyptian girl after paying a very large dowry. (Next 7/21). Now, according to AFP and ThisDay, the Registered Trustees of Supreme Council for Sharia in Nigeria has filed suit in the Federal High Court seeking a declaration that Yerima's right to privacy and his right to practice his religion have been violated by NAPTIP's investigation and planned investigations by the National Human Rights Commission and parliament. The suit alleges that the Child Rights Act is unconstitutional because Muslim religious law permits Yerima to marry up to four wives with no restriction on age. The Sharia group's lawyer says that a Muslim may "even marry a child in the womb of her mother."

Court Refuses To Enjoin Graduation Ceremonies In Church Building

In Does 1, 7, 8 and 9 v. Elmbrook Joint Common School District No. 21, (ED WI, July 19, 2010), a Wisconsin federal district court refused to permanently enjoin a Wisconsin school district from holding graduation ceremonies in a church. The court rejected the claim of unconstitutional coercion, saying: "plaintiffs unease and offense at having to attend graduation ceremonies at the Church and face religious symbols, while in no way minor, is not enough." Responding to plaintiffs' argument that the practice amounted to government endorsement of religion, the court said:

the District's decision to hold graduation ceremonies and the senior honors event in a house of worship holds symbolic force. However, considering the totality of circumstances, the reasonable observer would fairly understand that the District's use of the Church for these events is based on real and practical concerns, and not an impermissible endorsement of religion.

Finally the court also rejected plaintiffs arguments of excessive entanglement and unconstitutional use of taxpayer funds to support religion. (See prior related posting.)

Spain Rejects Broad Ban on Burqa

AP reports that Spain's Parliament on Tuesday defeated a bill that would have banned women from wearing the burqa in any public place. The lower chamber defeated the bill by a vote of 183 no to 162 yes with 2 abstentions. However the ruling Socialist government, whose legislators opposed the total ban, plans to introduce a narrower bill this fall that would merely ban wearing the burqa in government buildings. Mansur Escudero, president of the Islamic Commission of Spain, said he does not know of any Muslim women in Spain who currently wear the burqa on a regular basis.