Israeli Labor Court Says Private Catholic School Can Ban Muslim Teacher From Wearing Hijab

In Israel, the Jerusalem District Labor Court upheld the dress code requirements of a private Catholic school that barred a Muslim teacher from wearing a hijab (headscarf).  Today's Jerusalem Post reports that teacher Nada Nimri, who taught Arabic and Islam at the 120-year old Schmidt School for Girls, operated by the Mary Ward Sisters and owned by the Diocese of Cologne, decided after 27 years of teaching without wearing a hijab that she wanted to begin wearing one.  The school, which has both Catholic and Muslim students, enforces its dress code "in order to create uniformity between the students and teachers from Muslim and Christian backgrounds." Nimri argued that the requirement violated the Equal Opportunity in Work Law and the Equal Rights for Women Law (legislative background). The Labor Court held that because the school was a private school operated by a religious order, its pedagogical and educational concerns outweighed the burden on Nimri's religious beliefs.

Suit Against Scientology Creates Conflict Between State and Federal Judges

Saturday's St. Petersburg (FL) Times reports on an unusual clash between a state and a federal court judge in a case involving the Church of Scientology. Six years ago, attorney and vocal critic of Scientology, Ken Dandar, settled a state court wrongful death suit he brought against the Church of Scientology on behalf of the family of Lisa McPherson. She died in 1995 after being under the care of Scientology members for 17 days. As part of the settlement, Dandar agreed never to take another case against the Church of Scientology. However last year, Dandar filed a suit in federal court against Scientology's Flag Service Organization and the twin sister of Scientology's world leader, David Miscavige. Church attorneys claimed this violated the earlier settlement agreement, and state court Circuit Judge Robert Beach agreed. He ordered Dandar to withdraw from the federal case.

In response, Dandar filed a motion to withdraw, but attached an affidavit from his client asking that Dandar stay on because no other attorney will take the case. Federal district judge Steven Merryday decided that Dandar had not violated the settlement agreement and refused to allow him to withdraw. In response, state court judge Beach held Dandar in contempt and imposed a judgment of $130,000 to be paid to the Church of Scientology. Scientology's attorney said that Dandar could have gotten off the federal case by filing an affidavit claiming a conflict of interest. This angered federal Judge Merryday who saw it as an attempt to deceive the court. So he got Scientology's attorney and Dandar to agree to stop all proceedings in state court, including attempts to collect the judgement, until both sides can present full arguments in federal court. State court judge Beach says he does not think that a federal district court has jurisdiction to overturn his contempt finding.

Court OKs Menorah Display, But Not Use of City Personnel and Equipment To Light It

In Chabad of Mid-Hudson Valley v. City of Poughkeepsie, (NY App. Div., Aug. 31, 2010), a New York state appellate court held that the display of an 18-foot high menorah on public property in downtown Poughkeepsie (NY) did not violate the Establishment Clause because:

in the immediate vicinity of the menorah, as well as throughout the downtown area, are garlands, wreaths, and white lights, which ... "typify the secular celebration of Christmas".... These nearby secular decorations serve to emphasize the cultural message of Chanukah as represented by the menorah.... The relevant context also includes the symbols in the public lot ... 250 east [or the menorah display] ... which ... included not only a Christmas tree but a display of the Muslim faith in the form of a star and crescent. Therefore while the menorah does not lose its its religious symbolism, its surroundings negate any appearance of government endorsement....

The court concluded however that the Establishment Clause was violated in "allowing the plaintiffs to use municipal funds, labor, and equipment for the nightly menorah lighting, even if the plaintiffs repaid the City for such labor and equipment" because this "would foster the perception of an unconstitutional excessive governmental entanglement with religion."

White House Press Secretary: President Is a Committed Mainstream Christian

The Christian Science Monitor reported last week that Fox News commentator Glenn Beck is accusing President Obama of not being a true Christian, but instead of believing in Marxist-based "Liberation Theology". The issue was raised by reporters at yesterday's White House press briefing (full text) in this exchange with press secretary Robert Gibbs:

Q    Robert, for the last four days, Glenn Beck has criticized the President for believing in liberation theology, which he calls a Marxist form of Christianity.  I’ve got two questions.  One, does the President, to your knowledge, even know what liberation theology is?

MR. GIBBS:  I don’t know the answer to that.  I will say this, Bill, a crude paraphrasing of an old quote, and that is people are entitled to their own opinion, as ill-informed as it may be, but they’re not entitled to their own facts.  The President is a committed mainstream Christian.  I don’t -- I have no evidence that would guide me as to what Glenn Beck would have any genuine knowledge as to what the President does or does not believe.

Q    When is he going back to church?

Q    So this Marxist form of Christianity --

MR. GIBBS:  Again, I can only imagine where Mr. Beck conjured that from.

Mormon Church Talks With China Will Likely Lead To Regualarizing LDS Operations In China

In Salt Lake City (UT) this week, the Mormon Church announced that recent meetings with an official of the People's Republic of China are expected to lead to regularizing of the Church's operations in China. However the Church will not be sending missionaries to China. Instead the initiative means that the way in which the Church can legally proceed with daily activities in China will be clarified.

Abercrombie Sued For Second Time Over Clash Between Its "Look Policy" and Wearing Hijab

For the second time in a year, the EEOC has brought a lawsuit against clothing retailer Abercrombie & Fitch over the conflict between its "Look Policy" for its personnel and the need of Muslim women to wear a headscarf (hijab). The EEOC announced on Wednesday that it had filed suit in a California federal district court on behalf of an 18-year old whose application for a job stocking merchandise at an Abercrombie Kids store in Milpitas, California was rejected. According to the complaint, the applicant wore a headscarf to the job interview. The Abercrombie manager asked her if she was a Muslim and required to wear a headscarf. When she replied she was, the manager marked "not Abercrombie look" on her application. In September 2009, the EEOC sued Abercrombie in an Oklahoma federal district court for rejecting a prospective employee because she wore a hijab. (See prior posting.) Also in February 2010, a complaint was filed with the EEOC on behalf of a Muslim stockroom worker who was fired from Hollister (an Abercrombie subsidiary) in San Mateo, California, because she insisted on wearing her hijab. (See prior posting.)

California Trial Court Affirms Religious Court's Decision On Ownership of Torah Scrolls

The Los Angeles Daily News reports that on Tuesday a Los Angeles trial court confirmed a ruling by a Jewish religious tribunal in a dispute over ownership of four Torah scrolls. The court agreed with the bet din (Jewish religious court) that the scrolls belong to the widow of Rabbi Norman Pauker, and that they were merely on loan to Pauker's former assistant, Rabbi Samuel Ohana. (See prior related posting.) That conclusion was based on a handwritten loan agreement seen as authentic by the bet din.  Ohana is using the scrolls at his Sherman Oaks, California synagogue. Pauker's widow wants her nephews, who are rabbis, to have the scrolls for their synagogues instead.  The challenge to the ruling of the bet din was based on the fact that the religious tribunal ordered the scrolls returned not to Pauker's widow personally, but to Pauker's orgainzation, Valley Mishkan Israel Congregation. Ohana claimed the religious panel had no authority to do that since the widow personally, not the Congregation, was the party to the action. (See prior related posting.) [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

Court Refuses To Mandamus California Governor and AG To Defend Prop 8

The Recorder reports that the Pacific Justice Institute on Tuesday filed a petition for a writ of mandamus in California's Third District Court of Appeal, seeking to force California's governor and attorney general to defend Proposition 8-- the state's ban on same sex marriage-- in court. Both Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Jerry Brown have said publicly that they do not intend to defend the constitutionality of the voter-approved state constitutional amendment. Brown is the Democratic candidate for governor this fall. Apex News Network reports that on Wednesday the court refused to grant the mandamus petition. The court gave no reasons for its decision.

Army Accommodates Third Sikh Recruit

According to a release yesterday by the Sikh Coalition, the U.S. Army, for the third time in less than a year, has agreed that a Sikh recruit may enlist and continue to wear his religiously-mandated turban along with unshorn hear and a beard. Simran Preet Singh Lamba was brought into the army in 2009 through the Military Accessions Vital to the National Interest (MAVNI) program-- designed to recruit non-citizens who have needed language skills.  Lamba, a native of India, speaks Punjabi and Hindi. The Army's ruling (full text) granting Lamba religious accommodation said the exemption from the Army's hair and grooming policy is granted for basic training and military occupational school, and emphasizes that accommodation requests are considered on a case-by-case basis.

Fraud Claim Against Diocese For Nondisclosure of Priest's Past Sex Abuse Is Dismissed

In Doe v. Diocese of New Ulm, (MN Ct. App., Aug. 31, 2010), the Minnesota Court of Appeals dismissed claims against a Catholic diocese by several women who alleged that they were sexually abused as children by a priest, Father David Rooney. The court held that while plaintiffs' fraud claims were not barred by the statute of limitations, the claims stemmed from the diocese's failure to disclose Father Rooney's history of sexual abuse.  Nondisclosure amounts to fraud only if the diocese had a duty to disclose, and plaintiffs did not allege or establish any such duty.  The court rejected plaintiffs' theory that the diocese engaged in an implied affirmative misrepresentation that it was safe for Father Rooney to be around children when the diocese permitted him to serve as a pastor and have unsupervised access to minor children.

7th Circuit Says University of Wisconsin Must Make Student Activity Fees Available To Religious Worship

In a 2-1 decision yesterday in Badger Catholic, Inc. v. Walsh, (7th Cir., Sept. 1, 2010), the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals invalidated a University of Wisconsin policy that withheld student activity fee funding for worship, proselytizing  or religious instruction by recognized student groups. The majority opinion, written by Judge Easterbrook, concluded that the University acted improperly in refusing to fund certain programs of a Catholic student group. The group, Badger Catholic, was formerly known as the Roman Catholic Foundation. The majority held that funding religious programs on the same basis as programs of other student groups does not violate the Establishment Clause, and that the University must fund  the Catholic group's programs if similar programs that espouse a secular perspective receive money. The majority held however that an award of damages is not available to plaintiffs. They may obtain only a declaratory judgment or injunction as relief.

Judge Williams, dissenting, argued that while it is not required to do so, the University may create a limited forum and exclude worship from it because the practice of religion does not serve the purpose of the limited forum. She argued that the majority's treatment of purely religious activities as being merely a species of dialog, discussion or debate "degrades religion and the practice of religion." She asks:

If religion, and the practice of one’s religion, can be described as merely dialog or debate from a religious perspective, what work does the Free Exercise clause of the First Amendment do?

The Chronicle of Higher Education reports on the decision.

City Relents On Collecting Tax Assessment That Violates Religious Beliefs of Hindu Woman

The city of Evanston, Illinois has decided that it will no longer press a Hindu woman and her mother for a $635 tax bill reflecting an assessment that the woman says violates her religious beliefs. At issue is the removal of a box elder tree that stands mostly on common property of Padma Rao's condominium.  She says that her Hindu religion prohibits the needless killing of any living thing. (See prior posting.) Yesterday's Evanston Review reports that a city attorney now says the city is in the process of removing Rao from the delinquent tax notification list it sends the county.

City Rents Space For Satanist Exorcism Ceremony

Oklahoma City's Parks and Recreation Department, saying that it cannot constitutionally discriminate on the basis of viewpoint in renting out its Civic Center auditoriums, has agreed to rent out its smallest room, seating 100, to a Satanist Church for a public exorcism ceremony.  ABC News today reports that James Hale, the leader of the Church of the IV Majesties, says he wants to erase  fears about Satanism by opening the ritual exorcism of God to the public. He says that the ceremony, which is "a parody of the Catholic rite of exorcism," is designed to extract the gods of the "right handed path," that is, traditional religions such as Christianity, Judaism and Islam. Tickets for the Oct. 21 exorcism are $15.

7th Circuit: Rastafarian Failed To Inform Potential Employer That Dreadlocks Were Religious Requirement

In Xodus v. Wackenhut Corp., (7th Cir., Aug. 27, 2010), the 7th Circuit affirmed a trial court's holding that Wackenhut Corp. did not violate Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act when it refused to hire plaintiff, a Rastafarian, as a security guard because plaintiff refused to cut his dreadlocks. The Court affirmed the trial court's finding that plaintiff (whose name is Lord Osunfarian Xodus) failed to bring his religious beliefs to Wackenhut's attention. The Wackenhut manager, Clarence McCuller, who interviewed Xodus testified that when he told plaintiff about the company's grooming policy, plaintiff said that cutting his dreadlocks is "against my belief."  But McCuller testified that he was not aware of the Rastafarian religion and did not equate the use of the term "belief" with "religion." The Court wrote:

Xodus claims that his use of the word "belief" and the dreadlocks themselves sufficed to notify McCuller of the religious nature of his hairstyle. But unlike race or sex, a person’s religion is not always readily apparent.... "[E]mployers are not charged with detailed knowledge of the beliefs and observances associated with particular sects." ....  Nor does the fact that Xodus' name begins with the word "Lord" persuade us that McCuller knew the dreadlocks were religious.

Courthouse News Service reports on the decision.

Indonesian Court Orders Closure of Buddha Bar; Awards Damages To Plaintiffs

In Indonesia today, the Central Jakarta District Court ordered the Jakarta branch of the Paris-based Buddha Bar to close.  The court also ordered the company that operates the bar, along with the Jakarta's governor and its tourism agency that allowed the bar to operate,  to pay plaintiffs the equivalent of $111,000. Today's Jakarta Globe and M&C report that a group called the Anti-Buddha Bar Forum filed the law suit last year, charging that the bar's name and its use of Buddhist symbols violated laws requiring respect for state-approved religions. Last year the bar's owners, in response to complaints, renamed it, but plaintiffs say that is not enough because it has refused to remove Buddhist symbols used in the bar,

Court Refuses So Far To Drop Charges Against Preachers At Dearborn's Arab International Festival

A Dearborn, Michigan trial judge Monday, after two hours of oral arguments, refused, at least for now, to dismiss charges beach of peace and failure to obey lawful orders that have been brought against four street preachers for their activities in June at Dearborn's large Arab International Festival. One of the defendants, all members of Acts 17, was engaged in conversations with attendees at the Festival. The other three were videotaping the conversations. According to yesterday's Christian Post, police say the four drew and incited a large crowd, while defendants say their arrest violates their rights of free speech and free exercise of religion. They also claim the arrests were retaliation for an embarrassing video of activities of Festival security guards last year. The court said it needed clarification on some issues before finally deciding whether to drop charges. If they are not dropped, a trial will start Sept. 20.

Wide Ranging Challenge To Health Care Reform Includes Religion Claims

A group of individuals and organizations yesterday filed a lawsuit in a Nevada federal court asserting a wide range of constitutional challenges to the requirement in this year's Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act that all U.S. citizens and legal residents maintain health care coverage.  Several of the challenges in the 55-page complaint are based on the free exercise clause, the establishment clause and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.  The most straight forward are claims that the law forces Plaintiffs to fund abortion in violation of their religious beliefs and that it establishes "the secular religion of Socialism."  Some of the other religion claims in the complaint (full text) in People V US v. Obama, (D NV, filed 8/31/2010) are more elaborate:

47.... Plaintiff Joshua Hansen has a sincerely held religious belief that God will provide for his physical, spiritual, and financial well-being. Being forced to buy health insurance ...is highly offensive to his faith and beliefs. Plaintiff Joshua Hansen’s faith leads him to want to be free to obtain the health care of his own choosing, whatsoever health care he feels God directs him to obtain, including alternative forms of medicine, such as natural healing, homeopathic treatment, and other alternative forms of medical treatment not recognized or covered by PPACA....

73. Plaintiff TRACIE PISTOCCO is a Christian.... She has a sincerely held religious belief that charity is an obligation and sacrament of his faith as commanded by the Bible that people, as individuals—as opposed to government—are to care for one another. See Luke 14:13; Psalm 41:1, 2; 1 Timothy 6:17, 18. Part of this sincerely held religious belief is that all forms of Socialism are abhorrent and contrary to her Christian faith, because Socialism dictates, by force of law and without free will, that the government will take what the people have and distribute it to those who allegedly have less, regardless of latter’s need or attempt to care for themselves. She objects to PPACA because it compels her, under the guise of the "shared responsibility payment", to perform forced charity which violates the very foundation of his Christian faith.

74.... Christopher Hansen is a Christian and member and founder of the First Christian Fellowship of Eternal Sovereignty and believes that Socialism and its twin brothers, Communism, Fascism, and Marxism, are State/Civic religions and thus that Obamcare/ PPACA, an admittedly socialistic and compelled system of belief, violates the free exercise clause of the First Amendment, because it destroys his ability to exercise his religion according to the dictates of his own conscience. In his belief, Satan is the founder of compelled "charity," which violates the principles of free agency set forth in the scriptures in which Christopher Hansen believes, including the Bible and the Book of Mormon, and the Constitution of the United States of America, which he believes to be inspired by God and the only true political religion. To force him to participate in Obamacare thus violates his free exercise of religion under the First Amendment.

Courthouse News Service reports on the filing of the case.

Suit Claims IRS Has Special Policy To Scrutinize Non-Profit Applications From Pro-Israel Groups Opposed To Obama Policies

The non-profit pro-Israel, Zionist group, Z Street, filed a lawsuit in a Pennsylvania federal district court last week challenging on free expression grounds a purported policy of the Internal Revenue Service to scrutinize particularly closely applications for Section 501(c)(3) non-profit status from organizations that deal with Israel, and especially if the organization supports policies inconsistent with those of the Obama administration on the Middle East. The complaint (full text) in Z Street v. Shulman, (ED PA, filed 8/25/2010), asks for a declaratory judgment that the Israel Special Policy amounts to viewpoint discrimination and seeks an injunction requiring disclosure of the origin and development of the Special Policy. The lawsuit also asks the court to order that Z Street's application for non-profit status be considered expeditiously and fairly. In a press release announcing the lawsuit, Z Street said that its application for non-profit status was filed in January and has, according to an IRS agent, been stalled because of this special policy. The Forward last week said that experts are skeptical about Z Street's claim that its application was sent to a special IRS unit to determine whether its policies contradict those of the administration.

National Religious Moot Court Competition Scheduled For February

The 5th annual National Religious Moot Court Competition will be held at George Washington University Law School on Feb. 4-5, 2011. The competition is open to teams from ABA-accredited law schools. This year's problem deals with RLUIPA as it applies to zoning decisions. This year's final round will be judged by Judge Thomas B. Griffith of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit; Professor Michael McConnell of Stanford University's Constitutional Law Center and formerly of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit; and Melissa Rogers of Wake Forest University who is Chair of President Obama's Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships . More information is available at the website devoted to the competition. [Thanks to Ira "Chip"Lupu for the lead.]

En Banc Review Granted In Challenge To Orlando's Park Feeding Ordinance

The U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday issued an order (full text) granting an en banc rehearing in First Vagabonds Church of God v. City of Orlando, Florida.  The 3-judge panel in the case, in a 2-1 decision rejected free exercise, free expression and other challenges to Orlando's Large Group Feeding Ordinance that requires a permit to feed more than 25 people in any downtown park, and limits a group to 2 permits per year in any park. (See prior posting.) [Thanks to Glenn Katon for the lead.]