Groups Criticize Armenia's Proposed Amendments To Religious Organizations Law

Forum 18 reported yesterday that human rights activists and religious groups are strongly criticizing proposed amendments to Armenia's Law on Freedom of Conscience and Religious Organizations (full text) and proposed amendments to the country's Administrative Offenses Code, Law on Charity, and Criminal Code (full text). The drafts were presented to the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe in October for legal review. The draft law on religious organizations provides in part that: "Registration of a religious organisation shall be carried out on the basis of an expert opinion on its religiousness."  Among the information that an organization seeking registration must submit to the state registration body is:

information on the basics of the doctrine and the practice based thereon, including the characteristics of the given belief and history of origin of the given organisation, characteristics of the forms and methods of its activities, characteristics of attitude towards family, marriage and education, characteristics of the attitude towards the health of the followers of the given religion, on limitations of civil rights and obligations envisaged for the members and servants of the organisation

The draft also provides that a court may order liquidation of a religious organization on grounds of:

• Breach of public security and public order;
• Damaging human health and morality;
• Encroachment of human rights and freedoms;
• Arbitrary intervening in family affairs;
• Abetting persons "being in a state dangerous for life and health" to refuse medical aid based on religious motives;
• Instigate persons to refuse performing civil obligations prescribed by law and to commit other illegal actions.

A proposed new provision in the Criminal Code deals with proselytism. It would bar "distortion of religious convictions of persons in any direct or indirect form of persuasion through a reward or a promise thereof or moral assistance or material aid or deceit, as well as through exploitation of their lack of experience, trust, need, [or] low mental abilities."

Louisiana Rejects Attempts To Include Material on Creationism In New Biology Textbooks

In Louisiana, the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education’s 11-member Student/School Performance Committee voted 6-1 on Tuesday to approve biology textbooks that teach about evolution.  Fox News reports that the Committee rejected attempts by conservatives to add references to the debate about creationism or intelligent design.  The Louisiana Coalition for Science released a statement saying:

We are pleased and proud that the board has done the right thing. As a result, students in Louisiana public schools will have the most current, up-to-date information about biology, including the theory of evolution, which is the strongest explanation of the history and development of life on Earth ever constructed.

[Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Oregon Gives School Boards Guidance On Teachers Wearing of Religious Clothing

Earlier this year, the Oregon legislature passed a law repealing an 87-year old ban on teachers wearing religious dress in the classroom. (See prior posting.)  Yesterday Oregon's State Labor Commissioner and its Superintendent of Public Instruction jointly announced the creation of a model policy for school districts to use in applying the new law in their schools. The new model policy (full text) allows schools to ban religious dress when it is intended as, or would be perceived as, school district endorsement of the teacher's religious beliefs or as indoctrination or proselytizing of students. In determining intent or perception, schools may consider:

i. The size and visibility of the item of religious clothing;

ii. The inclusion of any writing or symbols on the religious clothing that communicates a direct message;

iii. Any accompanying verbal statements or declarations of a religious nature that go beyond a limited explanation of the religious significance or obligation associated with the wearing of the religious clothing;

iv. The number of employees requesting, or wearing, the same or similar religious clothing in the school; and

v. The reasonableness of this perception should take into account the age, background and sophistication of the student, parent, or employee in the school who regularly encounters the employee.

Peru Enacts New Religious Liberty Protections

The Adventist News Network reports that Peru's Congress (the South American country's unicameral legislature) last week passed historic legislation guaranteeing religious liberty. The new law protects public and private exercise of religion, except where it infringes on the freedoms or fundamental rights of others, or where it threatens public order or welfare. The law protects students, so their grades will not be affected by the practice of their religious faith.  It bars religious discrimination and guarantees all faiths the same rights, obligations and benefits.

7th Circuit Hears Oral Arguments In Day of Prayer Appeal

Last week, the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments 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.) The recording of the full oral arguments in the Court of Appeals is now available from the court's website. [Thanks to Illusory Tenant for the lead.]

European Council Rejects Kosher Slaughter Warning Label Requirement

JTA yesterday reported that the Council of the European Union has rejected a controversial kosher meat labeling requirement (Amendment 205) that had originally been approved by the European Parliament as part of new food information regulations.  The proposal would have required kosher meat to be labeled "meat from slaughter without stunning." (See prior related posting.) The reversal follows months of lobbying in Brussels by Jewish groups who feared that the pejorative label would cause prices to rise sharply because many non-Jewish purchasers of kosher meat would be deterred by the label. Currently 70% of kosher meat is purchased by non-Jews. The regulation still must come up for a second reading in the European Parliament where the amendment could be reintroduced. (Background on EU legislative process.)

British Hotel Owners Say Ban on Unmarrieds Occupying Same Room Is Not Sexual Orientation Discrimination

In Britain, a Christian couple who own a seaside hotel in Cornwall are facing civil charges that they violated the Equality Act by refusing to rent a double room to a gay couple. According to today's Bearsden Herald, owners Peter and Hazelmary Bull, however, say they were not discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation. They say they have a general policy, based on their religious beliefs about marriage, of not allowing unmarried couples-- heterosexual or gay-- to occupy the same room. A two-day hearing in the case is scheduled to begin Monday in Bristol County Court.

Catholic Religious Order Charged With Mishandling Abuse Claims Against One of Its Brothers

AP yesterday reported on a long series of events reflecting mishandling by the Catholic religious order, the De La Salle Christian Brothers, of sexual abuse charges against one of its Brothers, Raimond Rose.  Rose taught religion and history classes at De La Salle high schools in Minnesota, Wisconsin, North Dakota and California. He is charged with sexually molesting numerous boys in the 1960's, '70's and early '80's, often while accompanying them on school trips. 21 victims so far have filed lawsuits against Rose. One of the victims, Kenneth Price, contacted the Christian Brothers religious order in 1995. He was assured in a letter from Brother Thomas Johnson (now the second-highest official in the international Christian Brothers order) that Rose had been forbidden to be in contact with anyone under 18 and was working in a prison. It turns out, however, that Rose was chaplain for the Minnesota Correctional Facility-Red Wing, a facility for males ages 10 to 21. One of the inmates later sued Rose for molestation.

Michigan City Settles RLUIPA Suit, Lets Church Move Into Commercial Area

The Oakland County (MI) Daily Tribune reports that a Michigan federal district court last Friday signed a consent order under which the city of Hazel Park, Michigan settled a RLUIPA zoning lawsuit filed against it by the Salvation Temple that wanted to move into a building, but was denied a permit under an ordinance passed in 2005 that bars religious institutions in areas zoned commercial or industrial. (See prior posting.) Under the agreement, the church will be permitted to move into a building that was used as a banquet hall but has been vacant since 2002.  The church will bring the building up to code and will pay back taxes before the property becomes tax exempt. The building, on a triangular parcel of land near two interstates, was unlikely to find a commercial buyer. City officials say there was no economic benefit in their fighting the lawsuit. The settlement did not rule on the validity of the zoning ordinance which apparently effectively keeps churches out of Hazel Park because there is no residentially zoned property large enough to accommodate a church and required parking.

No State Action In Alleged Slander By Pastor

In Cohn v. Freeman, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128104 (WD NC, Nov. 22, 2010), a North Carolina federal district court dismissed a free exercise claim (as well as a claim for slander) brought pro se by plaintiff Debra Cohn who claimed that defendant, a pastor at Mt. Zion Restoration Church, told her son that his now deceased father believed that Cohn was trying to kill him. The pastor warned the son not to eat anything that Cohn prepared because she might be trying to poison him also. Following these events, Cohn stopped attending Mt. Zion Church. In dismissing the First Amendment claim, the court concluded both that defendant was not acting under color of state law nor did Cohn allege that she was asked or forced to leave her church.

Elaborate Sikh Community Dispute In Court In Canada

Today's Windsor (ON) Star reports on a law suit that has a Canadian court in the middle of a factional dispute at a Sikh Gurdwara in Windsor, Ontario. A power struggle among leaders of the Sikh Cultural Society of Metropolitan Windsor began in 2009 when a new executive was proclaimed.  The old officers refused to relinquish power and revoked membership of the newly elected officials. According to the paper's report: "Police have been called to the temple after heated arguments. One new member of the temple's executive committee says he was physically attacked in the driveway of his home while another says shots were fired at his house."

Three court orders have now been entered in the dispute. In the first order, the court reinstated the newly elected officers. On Monday the court issued a restraining order barring the old leaders from going within one kilometer of the Gurdwara Khalsa Parkash unless they are attending religious services.  They must give up possession of the premises and may not pass themselves off as authorized to represent the Society. Finally, 25 people named in the restraining order may not go within one kilometer of the homes of the new executive members. The contentiousness has led enough of the new board member to resign that the executive does not have a quorum. So in March the court will begin going through the membership records to determine who is a bona fide member entitled to vote for new executive members.

Changes To Pakistan's Blasphemy Law Challenged

According to M and C, a Pakistani court yesterday temporarily blocked action on government-proposed amendments to relax the country's blasphemy laws while the court considers a citizen's petition claiming that Parliament does not have a constitutional right to amend the country's laws relating to religion.  Meanwhile according to Cath News India, the Anglican Bishop of Lahore has criticized a proposed change to Pakistan’s blasphemy law that would outlaw insulting the Christian religion. Debate over the blasphemy law has increased since a Punjab district court sentenced a Christian woman, Asa Bibi, to death on blasphemy charges. (See prior posting.) Anglican Bishop Alexander John Malik said: "Jesus does not need a worldly law for His honor. We reject such a notion because extremists can take advantage of it."

Saudi Religious Police Say New Plan Works To Combat Deviant Extremist Ideology

According to a report yesterday by Asharq Alawsat, the Director of Saudi Arabia's Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice told a meeting of branch directors in Khobar Saturday that the Commission has begun to implement a plan to combat deviant extremist and hard-line ideology. The director, Dr.Abdul Aziz al-Humain said that "the CPVPV has played a supporting role in the efforts exerted by the Interior Ministry's security apparatus…and CPVPV members are participating in the Munasaha rehabilitation program for followers of deviant ideology...."

UN Third Committee Approves Defamation of Religions Resolution By Smaller Margin Than Last Year

Baptist Press reports that on Nov. 23,the United Nations Third Committee of the General Assembly approved a defamation of religions resolution (full text), but by a significantly smaller margin than last year.  The vote on the resolution this year was 76- 64 with 42 abstentions. Last year the vote was 81- 55.  The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom in its Fall Policy Focus discusses why the U.S. and others have oppose this resolution that has repeatedly been introduced by the Organization of the Islamic Conference. This year's resolution mentions "Judeophobia" and "Christianophobia" as well as Islamophobia as evils to be combatted. The U.N.General Assembly will vote on the resolution later this month.

9th Circuit Hears Oral Arguments In Challenge To California's Proposition 8

The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday heard oral arguments in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, the constitutional challenge to California's Proposition 8 that barred same-sex marriage. A video recording of the two hours of argument-- the first half on standing, the second on the merits-- is available from the court's website. Silicon Valley Mercury News reports on the oral arguments, saying that the court "appeared generally inclined to support the right of same-sex couples to marry in California. But how the judges reach that historic conclusion remains quite unpredictable." Scotus blog has an excellent summary of the oral arguments.

Meanwhile leaders of 26 religious groups across the country yesterday issued a letter titled "The Protection of Marriage: A Shared Commitment," in which they affirm their "shared commitment to promote and protect marriage as the union of one man and one woman."  Among the groups endorsing the letter are the National Association of Evangelicals, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, the Orthodox Church in America and the World Sikh Council. (Backgrounder on letter from Catholic Bishops.)

Paper Profiles FBI's Use of Informant To Infiltrate California Mosque

Yesterday's Washington Post carried a long article on the FBI's use of a convicted forger, Craig Monteilh, as an undercover informant who infiltrated an Islamic Center in Irvine, California to look for potential terrorists.  His tactics, however, backfired as Muslims at the mosque, concerned about his talk of violent jihad, obtained a restraining order against him. The case Monteilh built against one mosque member has collapsed and been dismissed by prosecutors. Meanwhile Monteilh has gone public to reveal how his FBI handlers trained him. The FBI and Justice Department say Monteilh's case is not representative of their generally good relations with the Muslim community. [Thanks to H. Kashk for the lead.]

Canadian Court Rules Against Break-Away Anglican Parishes

In Bentley v. Anglican Synod of the Diocese of Westminster, (BC Ct. App., Nov. 15, 2010), the Court of Appeal in the Canadian province of British Columbia refused to permit four break-away Anglican parishes to continue to use parish property and assets for worship. It also agreed with the trial court that a bequest to one of the parishes remained with it. In the opinion, the court rejected the American "neutral principles of law" approach to deciding disputes over church property. Finding that parish properties are held in trust, the court concluded:

the purpose of the trusts on which the parish corporations hold the church buildings and other assets is to further Anglican ministry in accordance with Anglican doctrine, and that in Canada, the General Synod has the final word on doctrinal matters. This is not to say that the plaintiffs are not in communion with the wider Anglican Church – that is a question on which I would not presume to opine. I do say, however, that members of the Anglican Church in Canada belong to an organization that has subscribed to “government by bishops.” The plaintiffs cannot in my respectful opinion remove themselves from their bishop’s oversight and the diocesan structure and retain the right to use properties that are held for purposes of Anglican ministry in Canada.

An excellent longer summary of the court's decision has been prepared by Lexology. (See prior related posting.)

Recent Articles, Book and DVD of Interest

From SSRN:

• Arnold Reisman, On Two Shoah Books Addressing Jews in Muslim Lands, (November 28, 2010).
• Robert A. Kahn, A Margin of Appreciation for Muslims? Viewing the Defamation of Religions Debate Through Otto-Preminger-Institut v. Austria, (U of St. Thomas Legal Studies Research Paper No. 10-27, 2010).
• Jeremy Waldron, The Image of God: Rights, Reason, and Order, (November 30, 2010).
• Ran Hirschl, Comparative Constitutional Law and Religion, (The Research Handbook in Comparative Constitutional Law, Tom Ginsburg and Rosalind Dixon, eds., Edward Elgar, 2011).

From SmartCILP:

• Robert MacCulloch & Silvia Pezzini, The Roles of Freedom, Growth, and Religion in the Taste for Revolution [Abstract], 53 Journal of Law and Economics 329-358 (2010).
• Catherine M.A. McCauliff, Religion and the Secular State [Abstract], 58 American Journal of Comparative Law 31-49 (2010).
• Mark Strasser, Passive Observers, Passive Displays, and the Establishment Clause,14 Lewis and Clark Law Review 1123-1157 (2010).
• Jennifer Wacek, The Multivocal Shari'a in History and Literature, 28 Wisconsin International Law Journal 299-324 (2010).

Recent Book:

• Timothy Lubin, Donald R. Davis Jr and Jayanth K. Krishnan (eds.), Hinduism and Law: An Introduction, (Cambridge Univ. Press, Oct. 2010).

New DVD:

• Christian J. Pinto, The Hidden Faith of the Founding Fathers, (Adullam Films, Oct. 2010), reviewed by OpEd News.

Is It Constitutional for New York to Criminalize Clergy's Performing Wedding With No Civil License For Couples?

A Forward article published last week raises the question of the constitutionality of New York's Domestic Relations Law, Sec. 17, which makes it a misdemeanor for any clergy member to "solemnize or presume to solemnize any marriage between any parties without a license being presented ... or with knowledge that either party is legally incompetent to contract matrimony." The article reports on the case of Yehuda Semel, who obtained a Jewish religious divorce from his wife. However their civil divorce proceedings are still pending in the courts.  Nevertheless, Semel has married another woman in a religious ceremony without obtaining a civil marriage license.  Most rabbis oppose performing a religious marriage ceremony where there has not been a civil divorce. Commentators argue, however, that it is a violation of the 1st Amendment for the state to make it illegal for a rabbi to perform a purely religious ceremony. It was not unusual before a 1983 change in the Social Security Law that preserved benefits for widows who remarry, for rabbis to perform a religious ceremony for a couple otherwise eligible to marry but who did not obtain a civil marriage license to avoid the woman's loss of her Social Security benefits. There was a Yiddish phrase for that type of marriage-- stile chupa (a "quiet marriage").

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Countryman v. Garcia, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125699 (D NV, Nov. 15, 2010), a Nevada federal district court allowed a Native American inmate to proceed with his claims that he was not permitted to perform daily prayers and was deprived of various items of religious property needed to perform rituals that are central to his Native American faith.

In Jones v. Burk, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126742 (ED CA, Dec. 1, 2010), a California federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing an inmate's claim that he was denied access to a prayer rug, a copy of the Qur'an and a Muslim cleric.

In Graham v. Fortier, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126814 (D NH, Nov. 15, 2010), a New Hampshire federal magistrate judge permitted an inmate to move ahead with allegations that her rights under the free exercise clause and RLUIPA were violated when restrictions on leaving the Closed Custody Unit after 6:00 p.m. prevented her from attending Hope Tabernacle services that were held only on Sunday evenings. However the magistrate recommended dismissal of plaintiff's claim that her rights were also infringed when she could not attend a spiritually-based Alcoholics Anonymous program called Breaking the Chains because it is held only on Tuesday evenings.

In Gutierrez v. Corrections Corporation of America, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127315 (D AZ, Nov. 15, 2010), an Arizona federal district court rejected an inmate's challenge to a prison policy that prohibits Catholic chaplains from bringing in sacramental wine.

Feliciano v. Burset, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127485 (D PR, Dec.2, 2010) is a lengthy opinion growing out of a 30-year history of challenges to prison conditions in Puerto Rico. As a small part of its opinion finding that food service conditions violate the Eighth Amendment because they create an unreasonable risk of malnutrition, food-borne illness and medical complications, the court observed that: "the failure to maintain any consistent program for providing special diets also causes the failure to honor diet restrictions imposed by an inmate's religion implicating Plaintiffs' First Amendment free exercise rights."