Religion Clause

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

France's Senate Passes Ban on Burqa and Niqab

France's Senate today, by a vote of 246-1, approved a bill banning wearing anywhere in public of garments such as the niqab or burqa that include a full-face veil. The National Assembly, the lower house of France's Parliament has already approved the bill. (See prior posting.) According to BBC, the bill now goes to France's Constitutional Council which has one month to confirm the law's constitutionality. If it passes this hurdle, it will go into effect in six months, though it could also be challenged before the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. Hours after the Senate's action, French police, in response to a bomb threat, evacuated the Eiffel Tower and the park around it. (CNN). It is not clear whether the threat was connected to the Senate's action.

UPDATE: To clarify the voting numbers, the French Senate has 346 members. (Wikipedia.) Most of the opposition Socialist senators abstained. They do not favor full-body veils, but oppose banning them through legislation. (Wall Street Journal).

Suit Seeks Religious Exemption From Catholic School For Immunization Requirement

Fox News yesterday reported on a lawsuit filed in a Nassau County, New York state court against a Catholic high school by parents of a 14-year old seeking to require the school to accept their religious objections to vaccination requirements and enroll their son. The parents, Andrea and Paul Polydor, say they believe that immunizations defile bodies as created by God and show a lack of faith in God and his divinely created immune system. Kellenberg Memorial High School says state law requires a Certificate of Immunization before students can begin to attend classes. New York law does provide for religious exemptions if the school determines the objections are legitimate.

Australian University Suspends Lawyer Over Smoking of Bible And Qur'an Pages On YouTube

In Australia, the Queensland University of Technology has placed research lawyer Alex Stewart on leave after he posted a 12-minute video on YouTube showing him smoking what he says were grass clippings wrapped in pages of the Bible and the Qur'an. The video was titled "Bible of Koran--which burns best?" Today's London Telegraph describes the video on which Stewart, an organizer with the Brisbane Atheists, calls the Bible and Qur'an "just books." Stewart now fears he will be fired over the video. University vice chancellor Peter Coaldrake said: "There is no need for this kind of thing, just to create disunity and disharmony among people living in Australia."

Street Preacher's Lawsuit Challenges DeWitt, NY Noise Ordinance

Yesterday's Syracuse (NY) Post-Standard reports that a lawsuit has been filed in a New York federal district by a Christian preacher seeking to have the DeWitt, New York noise ordinance declared unconstitutional. Traveling Catholic Christian evangelist Nicholas Auricchio was taken to a police station and cited last year for preaching in a loud voice on a public sidewalk. The charges were dropped within a month. The lawsuit claims that the ordinance's ban on any annoying sound that causes "public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm or disturbs the public’s peace, comfort or tranquility" violates Auricchio's free speech and free exercise rights.

9th Circuit Grants En Banc Review In Court Holding Cell Headscarf Case [corrected]

CBS 5 reported yesterday that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has granted en banc review in Khatib v. County of Orange. In the case, the 9th Circuit 3-judge panel, by a 2-1 vote concluded that a court house holding cell is not covered by the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. It therefore upheld the dismissal of a RLUIPA lawsuit filed by a Muslim woman who, on two occasions in a single day when the court was dealing with her probation violation, was required to remove her hijab (headscarf) for security reasons.(See prior posting.) [Note- an earlier version of this posting referred to the wrong circuit.]

Raelians Sue Pope Benedict XVI In British Court

In Great Britain, the European Raelian Movement has filed a lawsuit in Britain's High Court against Pope Benedict XVI charging him with violating international human rights law and committing genocide in Africa by continuing to claim that condoms do not prevent the spread of AIDS. According to a press release from the Raelian Movement, the complaint also alleges that the Vatican organized a disinformation campaign against Raelians in retaliation for the Raellians' attempt to call attention to the Catholic Church's child sex abuse scandal. Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict) was in charge of dealing with the sex abuse scandal in the 1990's. The Raelian Movement believes that all life on earth was created thousands of years ago by extraterrestrial scientists who were mistaken by our ancestors for gods.

Justice Department Sues California City Under RLUIPA Over Buddhist Temple Use Permit

A press release by the U.S. Department of Justice yesterday reports that the federal government has filed a lawsuit against the city of Walnut, California, charging that it violated the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act when it refused to issue a conditional use permit to the Chung Tai Zen Center for it to operate a Buddhist house of worship on land it owned. The complaint charges that the Center's application was treated differently from that of other religious and non-religious groups. Until its denial in 2008 of the Center's application, the city had not refused to issue a conditional use permit to build, expand or operate a house of worship since 1980.

Monday, September 13, 2010

11th Circuit Rejects Free Exercise Challenge To City's Business Regulation

In Manseau v. City of Miramar, (11th Cir., Sept. 10, 2010), the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed a free exercise claim brought against the city of Miramar, Florida by a couple who were fined for a number of code violations for operating a commercial roofing business out of their residence. Plaintiffs claimed that the citations and fines made them unable to practice their religion which was funded by their roofing business. The court, however, held that the code provisions regulating businesses were valid neutral laws of general application whose effect on religion was merely incidental.

Senegalese Court Convicts Muslim Holy Men of Violating Ban on Use of Children For Begging

Under pressure from human rights groups and U.S. foreign aid agencies, authorities in Senegal last month reversed a long-enrenched custom and banned marabouts-- Muslim holy men-- from enlisting children to beg for them. Then, according to yesterday's New York Times, last week for the first time seven marabouts were convicted by a court in Dakar of violating the ban. They were given a rather light sentence of six months probation and a fine, but many see the move as revolutionary. Human Rights Watch has estimated that there are as many as 50,000 children (called talibes), some as young as 4, on the streets of Senegal weaving in and out of traffic to beg for coins that they must then turn over to marabouts where they live. Supposedly the children are enrolled in schools teaching the Qur'an, but often they learn little. Observers are not sure whether last week's convictions are the beginning of a real enforcement effort or merely a symbolic gesture. The Koranic Teachers Association in the town of Louga called for Sengalese President Abdoulaye Wade to resign if the government insists on enforcing the ban on talibes.

Texas Gubernatorial Candidates Give Views On Teaching of Creationism/ Intelligent Design

The San Angelo (TX) Standard Times yesterday published responses of of Texas Gov. Rick Perry and his opponent in the November election, Houston Mayor Bill White, to questions on K-12 Education. Both were asked: "Explain where you stand on evolution-creationism being taught in the schools." Perry replied:

I am a firm believer in intelligent design as a matter of faith and intellect, and I believe it should be presented in schools alongside the theories of evolution. The State Board of Education has been charged with the task of adopting curriculum requirements for Texas public schools and recently adopted guidelines that call for the examination of all sides of a scientific theory, which will encourage critical thinking in our students, an essential learning skill.

His challenger, Bill White responded:

Educators and local school officials, not the governor, should determine science curriculum.

[Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Turkish Voters Approve Constitutional Changes That Will Pack Court To Approve More Religious Accommodation

In Turkey yesterday, a 58% vote of the electorate approved a package of constitutional changes. Among them were ones that increase the number of judges on the country's Constitutional Court and give Parliament a greater say in appointing judges. Yesterday's Toronto Globe & Mail reports that these changes pave the way for appointment of judges who will not strike down legislation accommodating religious practices, such as giving women the right to wear head scarves in universities.

Ministerial Exception Applies Regardless of Employees Subjective Intent

In Green v. Concordia University, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94168 (D OR, Sept. 8, 2010), adopting a federal magistrate's recommendations (2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94176, June 23, 2010), an Oregon federal district court held that the ministerial exception requires dismissal of a of plaintiff's claim that she was improperly denied admission on the basis of her age and other factors to the Director of Christian Education program of Concordia University, a Christian liberal arts university. The court held that the university's decision was based on criteria that are largely religious. It rejected plaintiff's argument that the ministerial exception did not apply to her Age Discrimination in Employment Claim because she intended to use her DCE certification to teach in public schools. Subjective intent of the employee is not the test. Instead the focus is on the characteristics of the position.

Sunday, September 12, 2010

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Beebe v. Birkett, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91690 (ED MI, Sept. 3, 2010), a Michigan federal district court, adopting a magistrate's recommendations, dismissed several claims by a Jewish prisoner, but allowed him to move ahead with a portion of his as-applied challenge to the prison's kosher meal policy. UPDATE: The magistrate's recommendation is at 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98186, Feb. 22 2010.

In Maier v. Wilson, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92732 (D MT, Sept. 7, 2010), a Montana federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92848, Aug. 5, 2010) and held that plaintiff suffered no injury from the prison's failure to post a list of disallowed religious books; that neither having to choose between going to his prison job or weekly Wicca services nor the prison's restrictions on tarot cards imposed a substantial burden on plaintiff's free exercise; that plaintiff was given adequate opportunity to practice his Wicca religion; and that treatment of Native Americans did not create an Establishment Clause or equal protection violation.

In Roberts v. Shearin, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92512 (D MD, Sept. 7, 2010), a Maryland federal district court dismissed an inmate's complaint that his free exercise rights were violated by a temporary ban on inmates receiving hard bound books, including religious books. It dismissed his complaint that he was not permitted to practice his religion of Kinteic Science because he had not taken any steps to have his religion and his requested accommodation recognized.

Mintun v. Peterson, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92489 (D ID, Sept. 3, 2010), involved a complaint by a Christian inmate who was gay about the anti-gay environment in the non-denominational fellowship service. He was barred by officials from attending that service while his complaints were investigated and was refused the right to create a separate service for gay Christians. The court dismissed the complaint, holding narrowly that plaintiff had not shown that other eight available Christian religious services were inadequate or that other inmates would attend a service for gay Christians.

In Verducci v. Marsh, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92712 (ED CA, Aug. 17, 2010), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed, with leave to file a more specific amended complaint, a county jail detainee's complaint that he was denied access to Jewish religious services, Jewish reading material and a kosher diet.

In Hankins v. Pennsylvania, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92743 (WD PA, Sept. 7, 2010), a Pennsylvania federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (Hankins v. Beard, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92864, July 29, 2010) and refused to dismiss an inmate's complaint that while confined in county jail he was not provided a religious representative and could not keep religious materials in his cell.

In Crump v. Prelesnik, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93178 (WD MI, Sept. 8, 2010), plaintiff alleged that prison authorities infringed his religious rights in a number of ways through retaliatory actions. These included a cell search that left his Qur'an and prayer rug face down on a muddy floor; requiring him to roll down and drag his pants in violation of a religioius prohibition; and delaying plaintiff's request for hygiene items that caused him to be unclean for his daily prayers. These retaliation claims are apparently among those that a Michigan federal district court permitted plaintiff to continue to pursue.

In Adkins v. Cabell, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93290 (SD WV, Sept. 7, 2010), a West Virginia federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations and dismissed a complaint by a Native American prisoner claiming verbal abuse and harassment over the practice of his religion, as well as a claim of physical abuse as retaliation for suing.

In Waff v. Reisch, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93012 (D SD, Sept. 7, 2010), a South Dakota federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93101, July 30, 2010), and dismissed an inmate's complaint that his religious rights were infringed when he was temporarily taken off the kosher diet plan for taking non-kosher food from another inmate's tray and buying non-kosher food from the commissary. Any claim for injunctive relief is now moot because the sanction policy has been changed. Claims for damages against the state are barred by the 11th Amendment. And plaintiff failed to show how the requirement that he again fill our the "request for religious diet" form violates his rights.

In Holliman v. Paquin, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93747 (WD WI, Sept. 7, 2010), a Wisconsin federal district court required an inmate to separate his religious infringement claims into a separate lawsuit from unrelated retaliation claims. Plaintiff alleged establishment clause claims relating to religious symbols in the prison and use of a state employee to lead Christian Bible study. Plaintiff's free exercise claims challenged forcing Muslims to pray in a room with religious symbols and staff walking through Jumu'ah services.

Potential Witnesses In Canadian Polygamy Challenge Seek Anonymity

In Canada last year, British Columbia's Attorney General asked the province's Supreme Court to rule on whether its anti-polygamy law is consistent with Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedom. The move came after unsuccessful attempts to prosecute two FLDS Church leaders. (See prior posting.) Now, according to the Winnipeg Free Press, a bishop of the FLDS Church has filed a motion with the Supreme Court seeking protection from prosecution for FLDS members in polygamous relationships that testify in the case. Lawyer Robert Wickett who represents the bishop says that testimony by people who have led meaningful lives in a polygamous community is essential to counter affidavits by former FLDS members detailing the harm that flows from polygamy. But the FLDS members want to use pseudonyms and sit behind screens when they testify, or testify by teleconference, to protect them from identification for future prosecution. The government says this would make it more difficult to cross examine the witnesses.

South African Court Bars Bible Burning Counterprotest

Spero News reports that on Friday, a South African judge barred a South African businessman and law student, Mohammed Vawda, from organizing a Bible burning day to protest the then-planned Quran burning by Rev. Terry Jones in Florida. The South African lawsuit was filed by an Islamic intellectual organization know as The Scholars of Truth. Plaintiffs convinced South Gautneg High Court, Judge Sita Kolbethat the planned Bible burning would be insulting to all religions. Defendant Vawda said that now he had been "enlightened by the judge who said that by burning the Bible, I am also burning the Qur’an because we share the same prophets."

High Schooler Says Nose Stud Is Religious Expression

In Johnston County, North Carolina, Clayton High School freshman Ariana Iacono is in a fight with school officials over the school's dress code. The student, who along with her mother is a member of the Church of Body Modification says her wearing a nose stud is an expression of her religious beliefs. WTVD News reported Friday that that a minister of the church, Richard Ivey, explains: "We believe that the mind body soul are all one entity and that by modifying the body, you can bring the mind and soul into harmony." Student Iacono says the nose stud helps her self esteem after years of abuse. However apparently the school district's lawyer has concluded that the nose stud is not a necessary part of Iacono's religion.

Today Is 60th Anniversary of JFK's Speech Dispelling Concern Over Catholic As President

Today is the 60th anniversary of the historic speech (full text and audio) by then presidential candidate John F. Kennedy to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association aimed at dispelling concerns about a Catholic becoming President. Here are a few excerpts:

I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute--where no Catholic prelate would tell the President (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishoners for whom to vote--where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference--and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the President who might appoint him or the people who might elect him....

Whatever issue may come before me as President--on birth control, divorce, censorship, gambling or any other subject--I will make my decision in accordance with these views, in accordance with what my conscience tells me to be the national interest, and without regard to outside religious pressures or dictates. And no power or threat of punishment could cause me to decide otherwise.

But if the time should ever come--and I do not concede any conflict to be even remotely possible--when my office would require me to either violate my conscience or violate the national interest, then I would resign the office; and I hope any conscientious public servant would do the same.

But I do not intend to apologize for these views to my critics of either Catholic or Protestant faith--nor do I intend to disavow either my views or my church in order to win this election.

If I should lose on the real issues, I shall return to my seat in the Senate, satisfied that I had tried my best and was fairly judged. But if this election is decided on the basis that 40 million Americans lost their chance of being President on the day they were baptized, then it is the whole nation that will be the loser, in the eyes of Catholics and non-Catholics around the world, in the eyes of history, and in the eyes of our own people.

Fred Schwartz writes in yesterday's National Review on the background and impact of the speech. Meanwhile, former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, speaking last Thursday at the University of St. Thomas in Houston (full text of remarks), delivered a rare criticism of Kennedy's historic speech, arguing that "Kennedy chose not just to dispel fear, he chose to expel faith."

Saturday, September 11, 2010

Appellate Court Grants Temporary Stay of Injunction Against Stem Cell Guidelines

On Thursday, the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit granted a temporary stay (full text of order) of a district court order that had enjoined the Department of Health and Human Services from applying the Obama administration's guidelines expanding the availability of grants for embryonic stem cell research. (See prior posting.) The court called for completion of briefing by the parties on the merits of a motion to stay the district court's injunction by Sept. 20. Meanwhile, according to Science Insider, the NIH is expediting grant applications hoping to be able to disburse funds for 24 ongoing grants up for renewal in September and for 20 grant proposals that had passed the first stage of peer review, all before the Sept. 20 deadline that could bring reinstatement of the injunction. Meanwhile on Thursday, plaintiffs challenging the guidelines filed a motion for summary judgment with the district court, accompanied by a 64-page memorandum in support of their position. (Full text of motion and supporting memorandum.)

Obama Presses For Tolerance and Free Exercise Rights For U.S. Muslims

The U.S. today marked the ninth anniversary of 9-11, following what the New York Times described as an "impassioned call" by President Obama for better relations between Muslims and non-Muslims. At his news conference on Friday (full text), the President gave lengthy answers to three separate questions on attitudes toward Muslims in the U.S. Here is the Q&A:

Q ... Nine years after the September 11th attacks, why do you think it is that we are now seeing such an increase in suspicion and outright resentment of Islam, especially given that it has been one of your priorities to increase -- to improve relations with the Muslim world?

THE PRESIDENT: I think that at a time when the country is anxious generally and going through a tough time, then fears can surface, suspicions, divisions can surface in a society. And so I think that plays a role in it.

One of the things that I most admired about President Bush was after 9/11, him being crystal-clear about the fact that we were not at war with Islam. We were at war with terrorists and murderers who had perverted Islam, had stolen its banner to carry out their outrageous acts. And I was so proud of the country rallying around that idea, that notion that we are not going to be divided by religion; we’re not going to be divided by ethnicity. We are all Americans. We stand together against those who would try to do us harm.

And that’s what we’ve done over the last nine years. And we should take great pride in that. And I think it is absolutely important now for the overwhelming majority of the American people to hang on to that thing that is best in us, a belief in religious tolerance, clarity about who our enemies are -- our enemies are al Qaeda and their allies who are trying to kill us, but have killed more Muslims than just about anybody on Earth. We have to make sure that we don't start turning on each other.

And I will do everything that I can as long as I am President of the United States to remind the American people that we are one nation under God, and we may call that God different names but we remain one nation. And as somebody who relies heavily on my Christian faith in my job, I understand the passions that religious faith can raise. But I’m also respectful that people of different faiths can practice their religion, even if they don't subscribe to the exact same notions that I do, and that they are still good people, and they are my neighbors and they are my friends, and they are fighting alongside us in our battles.

And I want to make sure that this country retains that sense of purpose. And I think tomorrow is a wonderful day for us to remind ourselves of that....

Q ... [W]ere you concerned at all when you -- when the administration had Secretary of Defense Gates call this pastor in Florida that you were elevating somebody who is clearly from the fringe?...

THE PRESIDENT: With respect to the individual down in Florida, let me just say -- let me repeat what I said a couple of days ago. The idea that we would burn the sacred texts of someone else’s religion is contrary to what this country stands for. It’s contrary to what this country -- this nation was founded on. And my hope is, is that this individual prays on it and refrains from doing it.

But I’m also Commander-in-Chief, and we are seeing today riots in Kabul, riots in Afghanistan, that threaten our young men and women in uniform. And so we’ve got an obligation to send a very clear message that this kind of behavior or threats of action put our young men and women in harm’s way. And it’s also the best imaginable recruiting tool for al Qaeda.

And although this may be one individual in Florida, part of my concern is to make sure that we don’t start having a whole bunch of folks all across the country think this is the way to get attention. This is a way of endangering our troops -- our sons and daughters, fathers and mothers, husbands and wives who are sacrificing for us to keep us safe. And you don’t play games with that.

So I hardly think we’re the ones who elevated this story. But it is, in the age of the Internet, something that can cause us profound damage around the world, and so we’ve got to take it seriously....

Q Thank you, Mr. President. I wonder if I can get you to weigh in on the wisdom of building a mosque a couple of blocks from Ground Zero. We know that the organizers have the constitutional right. What would it say about this country if they were somehow talked out of doing that? And hasn’t the Florida minister’s threat to burn a couple hundred copies of the Koran, hasn’t the threat itself put American lives in danger, sir?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, on the second -- on your second question, there’s no doubt that when someone goes out of their way to be provocative in ways that we know can inflame the passions of over a billion Muslims around the world, at a time when we’ve got our troops in a lot of Muslim countries, that's a problem. And it has made life a lot more difficult for our men and women in uniform who already have a very difficult job.

With respect to the mosque in New York, I think I’ve been pretty clear on my position here, and that is, is that this country stands for the proposition that all men and women are created equal; that they have certain inalienable rights -- one of those inalienable rights is to practice their religion freely. And what that means is that if you could build a church on a site, you could build a synagogue on a site, if you could build a Hindu temple on a site, then you should be able to build a mosque on the site.

Now, I recognize the extraordinary sensitivities around 9/11. I’ve met with families of 9/11 victims in the past. I can only imagine the continuing pain and anguish and sense of loss that they may go through. And tomorrow we as Americans are going to be joining them in prayer and remembrance. But I go back to what I said earlier: We are not at war against Islam. We are at war against terrorist organizations that have distorted Islam or falsely used the banner of Islam to engage in their destructive acts.

And we’ve got to be clear about that. We’ve got to be clear about that because if we’re going to deal with the problems that Ed Henry was talking about, if we’re going to successfully reduce the terrorist threat, then we need all the allies we can get. The folks who are most interested in a war between the United States or the West and Islam are al Qaeda. That’s what they’ve been banking on.

And fortunately, the overwhelming majority of Muslims around the world are peace-loving, are interested in the same things that you and I are interested in: How do I make sure I can get a good job? How can I make sure that my kids get a decent education? How can I make sure I’m safe? How can I improve my lot in life? And so they have rejected this violent ideology for the most part -- overwhelmingly.

And so from a national security interest, we want to be clear about who the enemy is here. It’s a handful, a tiny minority of people who are engaging in horrific acts, and have killed Muslims more than anybody else.

The other reason it’s important for us to remember that is because we’ve got millions of Muslim Americans, our fellow citizens, in this country. They’re going to school with our kids. They’re our neighbors. They’re our friends. They’re our coworkers. And when we start acting as if their religion is somehow offensive, what are we saying to them?

I’ve got Muslims who are fighting in Afghanistan in the uniform of the United States armed services. They’re out there putting their lives on the line for us. And we’ve got to make sure that we are crystal-clear for our sakes and their sakes they are Americans and we honor their service. And part of honoring their service is making sure that they understand that we don’t differentiate between them and us. It’s just us.

And that is a principle that I think is going to be very important for us to sustain. And I think tomorrow is an excellent time for us to reflect on that.

Meanwhile today, according to CNN, Rev. Terry Jones of the Dove World Outreach Center in Gainseville, Florida backed off his plans to burn copies of the Qur'an. The New York Times reported today on the efforts of many in Gainesville to repudiate the anti-Muslim threats by Jones.