Indian State Announces Quick Compensation To Kin of 10 Killed In Temple Stampede

AFP reports that in the Indian state of Bihar, outside a Hindu temple in the Banka district, a stampede late Saturday killed ten and injured 15 others as thousands came to the temple to sacrifice goats for the Hindu festival of Durga Puja (also known as Navartri Puja)-- a festival honoring the mother goddess Durga.  AFP says that the stampede was caused by rumors that a portion of the temple had collapsed or that snakes had entered it. However an AP report carried by the Wall Street Journal says that the injuries were triggered by arguments among those in attendance over whose goats would be sacrificed first. Some 30,000 goats were sacrificed at the temple on Saturday. According to Sify News, the Bihar disaster management department has announced that it would pay Rs.1 lakh (around $2270 US) to each relative of those killed.

China Bars House Church Members From Attending International Conference

The New York Times reported Friday that in China more than 100 Christians were barred by authorities from leaving the country to attend the Third Lausanne Conference on World Evangelization that begins today in Cape Town, South Africa. The Christians seeking to attend are members of unofficial "house churches" in China. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs said that Conference organizers did not invite representatives of China's official Christian churches and instead:

secretly extended multiple invitations to Christians who privately set up meeting points. This action publicly challenges the principle of independent, autonomous, domestically organized religious associations, and therefore represents a rude interference in Chinese religious affairs.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Hall v. Ekpe, (2d Cir., Oct. 13, 2010), the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a claim that a prison policy allowing attendance at formal Ramadan services only to inmates identified by the prison's chaplain as observant Muslims violated plaintiff's 1st Amendment rights. The court reserved judgment on plaintiff's damage claim under RLUIPA pending decision by the United States Supreme Court in a pending case on whether damages can be awarded in official capacity suits under RLUIPA. (See prior posting.)

In Avery v. Thompson, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106937 (ND CA, Oct. 4, 2010), a prisoner complained that his free exercise rights were infringed when 265 pamphlets published by a White supremacist publisher were confiscated from him. Since no evidence was introduced about the actual contents of any of the pamphlets, the court denied prison authorities' motion for summary judgment without prejudice, indicating that a reneewed motion could be made with a proper evidentiary showing.


In Krieger v. Brown, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108822 (ED NC, Oct. 13, 2010), a North Carolina federal district court rejected a prisoner's claim that his rights under RLUIPA and the 1st Amendment were violated by prison authorities refusal of his requests to use certain ritual items and an outdoor worship circle in the practice of his Asatru religion.


In Butler v. Hogue, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109072 (ND NY, Oct. 13, 2010), a New York federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109075, Feb. 4, 2010) and dismissed an inmate's claims that his 1st, 8th and 14th Amendment rights were violated when prison authorities served him a contaminated kosher meal on one occasion and soup in a defective container on another.


In Brancho v. Alexander, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109581 (ND OH, Oct. 14, 2010), an Ohio federal district court dismissed an inmate's free exercise claims that he was denied a religious diet and religious services because the complaint failed to allege adequate facts to show a violation and failed to connect particular defendants with the claims.


In Sayed v. Profitt, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109221 (D CO, Sept. 27, 2010), a Colorado federal district court rejected a claim by a Muslim inmate that his free exercise rights were violated because he was unable to perform full ablution before Friday Jum'ah prayers.  The claims for injunctive relief were moot because the inmate had been moved to a different facility. Some of the damage claims were barred by the 11th Amendment. As to others, the court found no violation of plaintiff's free exercise rights because substitute ablution is an adequate alternative.

Supreme Court Review Sought In RLUIPA Case

According to the Longmont (CO) Times Call, a petition for certiorari was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court last week in Rocky Mountain Christian Church v. Board of Commissioners of Boulder County, Colorado.  In the case, the 10th Circuit upheld a jury's determination that denial of a special use permit to a church violated the equal terms and unreasonable limitations provisions of RLUIPA. (See prior posting.) The 10th Circuit subsequently denied a rehearing after making minor changes in its original opinion. (See prior posting.)

Pastor Who Reversed Qur'an Threat Now Claims Car Offered To Him

In the midst of high-profile threats by Florida pastor Terry Jones to sponsor a Sept. 11 burning of Qur'ans (see prior posting), a New Jersey car dealer known for his unusual ads used one of those ads to offer Jones a year's free use of a new car if he did not go through with his plans.  According to AP on Friday, now that Jones has decided for other reasons not to burn Qur'ans, he is asking car dealer Brad Benson for the car. Jones says he will not keep the car for himself, but will donate it to an organization that helps abused Muslim women.  Car dealer Benson says he will now donate the car outright to Jones because he does not want to be connected to whatever Jones does with the car.

Council of Europe Parliament Affirms Healthcare Providers' Right To Conscientious Objection

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) on Oct. 7 adopted a resolution (full text) supporting the right of conscientious objection by medical providers.  As reported by Radio Free Europe last week, the PACE's Social, Health and Family Affairs Committee presented a very different draft (full text) to the Assembly. The draft focused on the problems posed by "unregulated use of conscientious objection," and recommended limiting its availability to individual health care providers directly involved in performing a procedure, and not to public hospitals and clinics as a whole.  The original proponents of the resolution would have gone even further and totally banned conscientious objection even by individual providers. PACE debated the proposal extensively. (See Press Release.) The resolution it adopted ended up broadly supporting conscientious objection.  The resolution reads in part:

No person, hospital or institution shall be coerced, held liable or discriminated against in any manner because of a refusal to perform, accommodate, assist or submit to an abortion, the performance of a human miscarriage, or euthanasia or any act which could cause the death of a human foetus or embryo, for any reason.

White House Defends Conference Call To Faith-Based Leaders On Health Care Reform

CNN yesterday reported that the White House is responding to criticisms of its faith-based office leveled by former Bush administration officials. At issue was a conference call to leaders of faith based and community groups by President Obama and Joshua DuBois, his director of faith-based initiatives, urging the leaders on the call to help explain the advantages of the Obama health care plan to their constituencies. (See prior posting). In a blog posting on the White House website yesterday, Joshua DuBois said in part:

recently, President Obama hosted a conference call with thousands of religious and community leaders to share important information about new health care benefits that will impact those in need. There could hardly be a more appropriate audience. When congregants falls ill, faith communities come together to support their brothers and sisters in need.  And when families struggle, they often turn to religious leaders for the spiritual and practical support to move forward. This is why faith leaders requested information about a new health care law that includes, for example, provisions that make it illegal for insurance companies to deny care to sick children, and allows young people to remain on their parent’s health insurance until they turn 26. 

White House Faith Based Head Keynotes Vatican Conference On Interfaith Action

This week Joshua DuBois, Executive Director of The White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships, delivered the keynote address (full text) at the Holy See's Conference on Interfaith Action held in the Vatican. He said in part:

My Office is also tasked with assessing, and improving, the United States Government’s engagement of religious issues and religious actors around the globe.  President Obama believes that faith-based organizations can be powerful catalysts for development and social action: from rebuilding communities ravished by natural disasters to responding to outbreaks of deadly disease.   The President also believes that while faith-based groups are powerful as singular actors, they can multiply their impact by joining across religious lines: Christians, Muslims, Hindus and Jews, retaining their individual beliefs but coming together to serve communities around the globe in times of dire need.  My Office seeks to create opportunities for this sort of interfaith engagement, and for the first time develop mechanisms for the United States Government to systematically partner with religious organizations abroad.

Bolivia Enacts Broad Anti-Discrimination Law, But Impact On Media Protested

On October 8, Bolivian President Evo Morales signed the newly enacted Law Against Racism and All Forms of Discrimination.  According to Workers World, the law prohibits racism and also prohibits discrimination based religion as well as numerous other grounds. A translation of the anti-discrimination section is furnished as part of the Andean Information Network's analysis of the law:

A person who arbitrarily or illegally obstructs, restricts, infringes upon, impedes or prevents the exercise of individual or collective rights, motivated by sex, age, gender, sexual orientation or gender identity, cultural identity, family affiliation, nationality, citizenship, language, religious creed, ideology, political opinion or philosophy, marital status, economic or social situation, illness, occupation, level of education, being differently abled or having a physical, intellectual or sensory disability, pregnancy, regional origin, physical appearance and dress, will be sanctioned to a prison sentence between one and five years.

The news media oppose two sections of the new law that prohibit the media from publishing or broadcasting racist or discriminatory statements, even when reporting statements by third parties. Sanctions include withdrawal of operating licenses and prison sentences for journalists and media owners. CNN reports that 28 journalists in Santa Cruz are on a hunger strike in protest, fearing that the government will use the new law to muzzle media outlets that publish articles supporting political opponents. Journalists and others are seeking a national referendum on the provisions that impact the press.

Hundreds Turn Out for "Islam on Capital Hill"

CNN reports that hundreds of Muslims today turned out on in Washington for Islam on Capitol Hill.  Event organizer Abdul Malik said that the event, which he hopes to hold annually, is aimed mainly at Muslim young people. Malik said: "Muslim children need to know that this is their country and that they have a responsibility to protect and honor it. I want to make sure they're not radicalized by any elements, especially on the internet." The day included tours of Congress, prayers, speeches and a banquet.

7th Circuit Upholds Illinois Moment of Silence Law

In a 2-1 decision yesterday, the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Illinois' Silent Reflection and Student Prayer Act against Establishment Clause and vagueness challenges.  The Act requires every public school classroom to open with "a brief period of silence." The statute goes on to provide: "This period shall not be conducted as a religious exercise but shall be an opportunity for silent prayer or for silent reflection on the anticipated activities of the day."  The majority in Sherman v. Koch, (7th Cir., Oct. 15, 2010), held:

The Illinois legislature had a secular purpose in passing Section 1, namely mandating a period of silence to calm school children before the start of their day. There is no evidence that the secular purpose is a sham and that Illinois’s true purpose was to promote prayer. And there is nothing impermissible about clarifying that students may pray during that time period. Section 1 also does not advance or inhibit religion (or specific religions that practice momentary silent prayer), but rather mandates only a period of silence. There is also no state entanglement with religion. Therefore, Section 1 satisfies the Lemon test and Sherman’s First Amendment challenge fails. Sherman’s vagueness challenge also fails because Section 1 is not unconstitutionally vague in all of its operations.

Judge Williams dissenting however argued:

The Act makes what I believe to be an unnecessary reference to prayer, signaling a predominantly religious purpose to the statute. And by enumerating prayer as one of only two specific permissible activities, the Act conveys a message that Illinois students should engage in prayer during the prescribed period as opposed to a host of other silent options. I have concluded that the purpose and effect of the Act is to encourage prayer in public schools, which violates the first two prongs of the Lemon test.

The Chicago Tribune reports on the decision. Among the advocacy groups issuing press releases on the case were the ACLU of Illinois and Alliance Defense Fund.  (See prior related posting.)

School Board Drops Bible Class In Response To Lawsuit

Indy Channel News today reports that in response to an ACLU lawsuit filed earlier this month, the Fairfield, Indiana school district board voted unanimously yesterday to end a Bible class that was offered in the district's New Paris Elementary School.  The suit was filed on behalf of a first-grader and his mother, alleging that the student was left unsupervised in the school hallway during the 20-minute weekly class after his mother opted him out of it. Even though the school board's attorney advised the board that they would clearly lose the federal court lawsuit, 48 people attending the school board meeting urged the board to fight the suit.  One parent told the board: "Anything through God is possible."

USCIRF Urges Obama To Raise Religious Freedom Issues On His Trip To Indonesia, India

The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom this week sent a letter (full text) to President Obama urging him to highlight the importance of religious freedom during his upcoming visits to Indonesia and India. On Indonesia, the letter said:

In our visit earlier this year, USCIRF was impressed by the commitments made by officials from different levels of government to advance religious freedom and related human rights as essential to Indonesia’s democratic future.  However, strong political forces, terrorist networks, and extremist groups continue to challenge Indonesia’s democratic trajectory and are a source of ongoing, serious violations of religious freedom and related human rights.

As to India, USCIRF said:

India’s democracy, religious pluralism, and tradition of religious tolerance are truly noteworthy. Despite this history of tolerance and the current national government’s commitment to sustaining it, unfortunately episodic communal violence continues to occur.  The governmental response, particularly at the state and local levels, has not been adequate, and justice for victims, such as those in Gujarat and Orissa, often has been slow and ineffective. 

5th Circuit Upholds Texas Pledge Against Establishment Clause Attack

In Croft v. Perry, (5th Cir., Oct. 13, 2010), the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected an Establishment Clause challenge to the Texas pledge of allegiance (which includes the phrase "one state under God") and to a state statute requiring school students to recite the pledge each day.  Treating the suit as a facial challenge to the pledge and the related statute, the court concluded:

The pledge is a patriotic exercise, and it is made no less so by the acknowledgment of Texas’s religious heritage via the inclusion of the phrase "under God." A pledge can constitutionally acknowledge the existence of, and even value, a religious belief without impermissibly favoring that value or belief, without advancing belief over non-belief, and without coercing participation in a religious exercise.

The Houston Chronicle reports on the decision. (See prior related posting.) [Thanks to Kate Shellnutt for the lead.]

Malaysia Promotes Islamic Finance

Islamic banking is growing fast in Malaysia which is promoting itself as the world's center for Shariah compliant financial products. Bloomberg Business Week reports today that Malaysian banking assets that comply with the Islamic ban on interest rose to the equivalent of $109 billion (US)-- 20% of Malaysia's total banking assets. Also Islamic insurance (takaful) now accounts for 9% of Malaysia's insurance industry. The Ministry of Finance's 2010-2011 Economic Report sets out the new data.

Mixed Response To Schools' Limits On Wearing Rosaries

Catholic News Service this week reported that the Catholic Diocese of Colorado Springs, Colorado has decided not to oppose a decision by some Colorado Springs schools to allow students to wear rosaries only if they are tucked into their shirts. The Diocese said in an Oct. 12 statement: "Because some gangs in the local area have decided to wear rosaries as jewelry as a symbol of their gang affiliation, the diocese does not oppose the decision by some schools in School District 11 to ask students who choose to wear rosaries to keep them inside their shirts."  Last week the ACLU announced it opposed the school's policy and the American Center for Law and Justice sent a letter to the principal of Mann Middle School threatening to sue on behalf of a student if the policy is not changed. (UPI). However Colorado Springs Diocese judicial vicar and chancellor Msgr. Ricardo Coronado-Arrascue said that rosaries are not meant to be jewelry and opposed the use of rosaries to symbolize gang membership.  A memo from Mann Middle School to students and parents said that some Catholics are offended by rosaries being worn like fashion accessories.

Residents Protest Removal of Christian Flag From War Memorial

As previously reported, last month King City, North Carolina's city council voted to remove a Christian flag that had flown at the city's veteran's memorial along with U.S., state and other flags. Today's Daily Tar Heel reports that, in response, residents have been protesting. They placed a new Christian flag there on a temporary stand and are guarding it 24 hours a day. The protest will continue until Oct. 23 when there will be a march through town to support a return of the flag which depicts a soldier kneeling in front of a cross. Also local businesses and homes are now flying the flag and vendors are selling T-shirts and magnets depicting it.  A supporter said: "We are not trying to represent diversity of the world. We are trying to represent the community and the values that the country was founded on."

Chaplain Says DADT Injunction Will Impact Ability To Counsel Soldiers

On Tuesday, a California federal district court in Log Cabin Republicans v. United States, (CD CA, Oct. 12, 2010), held, in a lengthy opinion, that the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy violates due process and 1st Amendment speech and petition rights of gay and lesbian members of the armed forces. The accompanying 3-page order imposing a permanent injunction bars enforcement of "don't ask, don't tell" and requires the government to discontinue any pending investigation or discharge under the rules.  Baptist Press yesterday interviewed retired Chaplain (Col.) Keith Travis who is now chaplain team leader for the North American Mission Board, who said:

In order to best serve soldiers, our chaplains need to be able to practice their faith freely. Under this order, there's a question as to whether our chaplains would be able to offer the full counsel of Scripture to soldiers who seek their guidance.

CNN reported yesterday that even though the Obama administration opposes "don't ask, don't tell", the Justice Department is likely to seek an emergency stay of the district court's injunction and, if rejected by the district court, to file an appeal with the 9th Circuit.

Ontario High Court Says Allowing Witness To Wear Niqab Requires Contextual Analysis

In Canada yesterday, Ontario's highest appellate court held that a judge conducting a preliminary inquiry in a criminal case has discretion whether or not to permit Muslim women to testify with their face covered.  In The Queen v. N.S., (Ont. Ct. App., Oct. 13, 2010), defendants were charged with criminal sexual assault. The victim, niece and cousin of defendants, asserted the right to continue to wear her niqab, with her face covered, when testifying at the preliminary inquiry. The court said in part:

just as the preliminary inquiry judge has the power to regulate how and when a witness will testify, he or she has the power to determine whether a witness should be required to change his or her attire before testifying.... While it is clear that face to face confrontation between the accused and prosecution witnesses is the accepted norm in Canadian criminal courts, there is no independent constitutional right to a face to face confrontation....  Departures from the traditional face to face public confrontation between accused and witness will run afoul of the Charter only if they result in a denial of a fair trial to the accused...... A minimal interference with cross-examination would not impair an accused's right to a fair trial and would not justify any limitation on the witness's exercise of her right to freedom of religion....

The reconciliation may be very different at a preliminary inquiry, where the witness's credibility is essentially irrelevant, than at trial, where the outcome of the case and the accused's liberty may turn entirely on the witness's credibility....

Perhaps the most difficult aspect of the contextual analysis is that which requires the court to take into account other constitutional values and societal interests.... N.S. is a Muslim, a minority that many believe is unfairly maligned and stereotyped in contemporary Canada. A failure to give adequate consideration to N.S.'s religious beliefs would reflect and, to some extent, legitimize that negative stereotyping. Allowing her to wear a niqab could be seen as a recognition and acceptance of those minority beliefs and practices and, therefore, a reflection of the multi-cultural heritage of Canada recognized in s. 27 of the Charter. Permitting N.S. to wear her niqab would also broaden access to the justice system for those in the position of N.S., by indicating that participation in the justice system would not come at the cost of compromising one's religious beliefs....

There is also a societal interest pointing against a witness wearing a niqab when testifying. Society has a strong interest in the visible administration of criminal justice in open courts where witnesses, lawyers, judges and the accused can be seen and identified by the public.... Attempts to reconcile competing interests using "constructive compromises" might include the use of an all female court staff and a female judge. Those measures might also include, where constitutionally permissible, an order that a witness be cross examined by female counsel....  If necessary, the court could be closed to all male persons other than the accused and his counsel. In this case, resort to the measures outlined above could result in N.S., if she was required to remove her niqab, revealing her face to only one male person, M---d.S., to whom her religious beliefs indicated she should not....

If the judge concludes that the wearing of the niqab in all of the circumstances would infringe the accused's right to make full answer and defence, that right must prevail over the witness's religious freedoms and the witness must be ordered to remove the niqab.

The Toronto Sun reported on the Court of Appeal for Ontario's decision.

Supreme Court Refuses Review In One Case; Permits SG To Argue In Another

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court granted two orders of interest in the church-state/ religious freedom area. (Order list).  It denied certiorari in Association of Christian Schools v. Stearns, (Docket No. 90-1461). In the case, the 9th Circuit rejected constitutional challenges to the University of California's admissions policy.  The University refuses to accept certain high school courses offered by Christian schools as courses that will be counted to qualify students for admission. (See prior posting.)

In Garriott v. Winn  (Docket No. 09-991) along with Arizona Christian School Organization v. Winn (Docket No. 09-987), -- both on the Court's docket for this term-- the Court granted the motion of the Acting Solicitor General to participate in oral argument on the side of appellant. In the case, a 3-judge panel of the 9th Circuit found taxpayer standing and ruled that, as applied, Arizona's tax credit of up to $500 to individuals who contribute funds to nonprofit "school tuition organizations" violates the Establishment Clause. The 9th Circuit then denied en banc review, but with 40 pages of opinions. (See prior posting.) The government in its amicus brief filed in the Supreme Court argues both that challengers lack standing to assert their claim and that on the merits the Arizona statute is a constitutionally permissible neutral program that permits individuals to direct aid to religious programs.