Muslim Employees Prevail In Two EEOC Cases Involving Religious Accommodation

Muslim employees of two different companies have obtained favorable results after filing complaints with the EEOC. In one case, according to BNA's Daily Labor Report Monday, Swedish-based Electrolux Group has decided to change the evening shift meal breaks during Ramadan this year so employees will be able to break their fast and still abide by company rules that prohibit food on the production floor.

In an unrelated case, also reported by BNA's Daily Labor Report on Monday, White Lodging Services, Inc. which manages the Louisville (KY) Downtown Marriott has settled a lawsuit brought by the EEOC on behalf of four Muslim women who were denied job interviews in 2005 when they would not remove their hijabs. Marriott dress policy did not allow employees to wear head coverings that were not part of their uniforms, and the housekeeping manager who rejected the women was not aware of the significance of the hijab. The company will pay $10,000 to settle with each of the women, and will provide equal opportunity training for Hotel employees. (EEOC press release, 7/21). [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

Utah High Court Reverses FLDS Leader Warren Jeff's Conviction

The Utah Supreme Court today reversed the rape as an accomplice conviction of FLDS leader Warren Jeffs. (See prior posting.)  In State of Utah v. Jeffs, (UT Sup. Ct., July 27, 2010), a unanimous court held that the jury had been improperly instructed on the issue of consent. Jeff's conviction grew out of his role in the compelled marriage of a 14-year old, Elissa Wall,  to her nineteen-year-old first cousin, Allen Steed. Utah law provides that intercourse with a minor is non-consensual where the actor occupied a position of special trust in relation to the victim. The trial court erroneously instructed the jury that this referred to whether Jeffs, the accomplice, occupied a position of trust, instead of whether Steed, the person having intercourse with Wall, occupied such a position. The court also clarified the state of mind requirement in order to convict Jeffs as an accomplice. He must have been aware, at a minimum, of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that his actions would result in rape being committed by another person. And where the charge is aiding another, rather than soliciting, encouraging or commanding the action, the accomplice must have acted intentionally. The Salt Lake Tribune reports on the decision.

UPDATE: AP (7/28) reports that Texas and federal authorities still have charges pending against Jeffs who could now be tried under those indictments. Meanwhile KSL News has Elissa Wall's reaction to the decision. Wall is in a witness protection program.

Canadian Appellate Court Opens Door To Refugee Status For U.S. Conscientious Objector to Iraq War

In Hinzman v. Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, (Fed. Ct. App., July 6, 2010), Canada's Federal Court of Appeal held than an American soldier's application for permanent residency as a refugee based on "humanitarian and compassionate" grounds may be granted when his refusal to deploy to Iraq was based on a sincere and deeply held moral, political or religious objection to a particular war. In a decision below, the applications judge agreed with the H&C Officer that the CO's potential punishment for desertion in the United States did not justify granting his application because "hardships attached to laws of general application in a democratic state cannot be considered as unusual and undeserved or disproportionate under Canadian law." The appeals court held, however, that "the H&C Officer had the duty to look at all of the appellants’ personal circumstances, including Mr. Hinzman’s beliefs and motivations, before determining if there were sufficient reasons to make a positive H&C decision." Axis of Logic yesterday, reporting on the decision, says that it has "[set] the stage for a new immigration review process for all those Iraq- and Afghanistan-assigned American soldiers who came to Canada as conscientious objectors." However Canada's Minister of  Citizenship and Immigration Jason Kenney is opposed to allowing American CO's to remain in Canada.

Rabbi Sentenced In Fraud Case From 1980's

In a Manhattan federal court yesterday, Rabbi Avrum Friesel was sentenced to 27 months in jail  and ordered to pay $11 million in restitution for a fraud committed by leaders of the Hasidic village of New Square, New York in the 1980's. Yesterday's New York Post reports that Friesel, after spending eleven years on the run in Israel and Great Britain, plead guilty after being extradited from Britain last year. The offenses included obtaining $10 million in fraudulent Pell grants for ineligible students at a Brooklyn seminary. The court granted a downward departure from the Federal Sentencing Guidelines 41 month sentence because of Friesel's minor role in the fraud and his history of working with disabled children. Friesel said he was deeply ashamed of breaking American civil law, which meant he also broke Jewish religious law. Four co-defendants were convicted in 1999, but their sentences were commuted by President Bill Clinton on his last day in office in 2001. The New York Post notes that the commutation came shortly after Hillary Rodham Clinton won almost every vote in New Square, NY in her race for the U.S. Senate. 

New Jersey Appellate Court Says Religious Belief Does Not Excuse Coerced Sex With Wife

In S.D. v. M.J.R., (NJ Super. Ct. App. Div., July 23, 2010), a New Jersey appellate court held that the trial court should have issued a final restraining order to protect a Muslim woman who had been the victim of her husband's domestic violence. The trial court judge had concluded that while the husband's coerced sex with his wife constituted sexual assault, the husband did not have the requisite sexual intent because of his belief that his religion permitted him to require his wife to comply with his sexual demands. The appellate court held: "Because it is doubtlessly true that the laws defining the crimes of sexual assault and criminal sexual contact are neutral laws of general application, and because defendant knowingly engaged in conduct that violated those laws, the judge erred when he refused to recognize those violations as a basis for a determination that defendant had committed acts of domestic violence."

Tennessee Lt. Gov. Questions Freedom of Religion For Muslims

TPMDC reported yesterday that Tennessee Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey, a candidate in the state's gubernatorial primary (currently running third), suggested in an answer to a question at a campaign event that Islam may not be protected by the Constitution's free exercise clause. Referring to a dispute over a zoning change to permit an Islamic center to be built in Murfreesboro (TN), (background from CNN) he said: "Now, you know, I'm all about freedom of religion. I value the First Amendment as much as I value the Second Amendment as much as I value the Tenth Amendment and on and on and on. But you cross the line when they try to start bringing Sharia Law here to the state of Tennessee -- to the United States. We live under our Constitution and they live under our Constitution." In a rambling answer, he also remarked: "Now, you could even argue whether being a Muslim is actually a religion, or is it a nationality, way of life, cult whatever you want to call it. Now certainly we do protect our religions, but at the same time this is something we are going to have to face."

Russian Prosecutors Open Criminal Prosecution Against Scientology Group

Today's Moscow Times reports that prosecutors in the Russian town of Shchyolkovo, northeast of Moscow, have opened a criminal prosecution against the Church of Scientology on the grounds that it is promoting extremism. The action follows an April decision by a Siberian court that added 28 works by Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard to the country's list of extremist material. (See prior posting.)

Battle Over Conversion Law In Israel Takes 6-Month Pause

Today's Jerusalem Post carries an op-ed by Natan Sharansky, chairman of the Jewish Agency, reviewing the battle that has gone on for the past two weeks in the Israeli Knesset over proposed new legislation on conversion.  As reported by the New York Times on Friday, the bill began as an attempt to make conversion to Judaism easier for 300,000 Russian immigrants who came to Israel but are not considered Jewish under Orthodox religious law. The Knesset proposal did this by giving conversion authority to local rabbis around the country. However, when Orthodox authorities objected, the bill was amended to provide that Orthodox Jewish law would be the basis for conversion. That led to massive protests from the Jewish community in the United States who saw this as an attempt to undercut progress in litigation that had been made by the Reform and Conservative movements to have their conversions recognized. As the Knesset adjourned for the summer, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office announced a compromise under which both sides would negotiate for the next six months. Until January, no conversion law will be introduced in the Knesset, and litigation before Israel's Supreme Court by the Reform and Conservative movements will be suspended for the same period.

Reality Show Seeking Progressive Muslim Leader Is Popular In Malaysia

AP reported yesterday on a reality show that is garnering large audiences on an Islamic-themed cable channel in Malaysia. "Imam Muda" (Young Leader) is seeking a pious but progressive young Muslim man who can show that religion can remain relevant to Malaysian young people. The ten men, between 18 and 27, ultimately picked as contestants for the show are photogenic and could pass as models. The contestants are sequestered in a mosque hostel. The tasks they have performed, featured on different episodes, include performing Muslim ablutions on two unclaimed corpses and burying the bodies; and counseling residents of a shelter for women and homeless children. The ultimate winner will receive an all-expense paid pilgrimage to Mecca, an automobile, a position as prayer leader in a major mosque, a scholarship to study in Saudi Arabia and $6400 (US) cash.

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.