Amended Gay Marriage Bill With Expanded Religious Exemptions Introduced In New York

The Wall Street Journal reports that Gov. Andrew Cuomo and lawmakers introduced an amended version of the same-sex marriage bill (full text)  into the state legislature today. The new version expands protections for religious organizations and clergy that object to same-sex marriage. Backers hope this will be enough to convince at least one more member of the state Senate to vote in favor of the bill and thereby secure its passage.  The prior version of the bill, already passed by the state Assembly, had somewhat less comprehensive exemptions in it, and Senate Republicans had been seeking this expansion. (See prior posting.)

Israel's High Court Recognizes Civil Marriage By Proxy

Israel's High Court of Justice this week recognized a new route for Israeli's to enter a civil marriage.  Generally marriages in Israel must be performed by religious authorities, though individuals may travel abroad for a civil marriage which will then be recognized in Israel.  For Jewish Israelis, this has meant that the Orthodox rabbinate controls marriage in the country.  Haaretz reports that the High Court has now approved the marriages of 14 couples who were married by proxy in El Salvador without ever leaving Israel. Most of the marriages involved one partner who was a foreign worker or tourist who were concerned that they could not obtain re-entry if they left the country.  The Salvadoran procedure requires elaborate documentation and the hiring of two proxies to stand-in for the parties in El Salvador and two witnesses. Up to now, the only non-religious alternative available inside Israel has been civil union where both parties to the marriage have no religious affiliation. (See prior posting.)

Court Says Abused Plaintiffs Can Seek Punitive Damages Against Jesuit Order

In Doe v. Chicago Province of the Society of Jesus, (Cook Co. IL Cir. Ct., June 22, 2011), an Illinois state trial court judge has allowed three plaintiffs who claim they were sexually abused by now-defrocked Jesuit priest Donald McGuire to file an amended complaint seeking punitive damages against the priest's Jesuit order.  The court reviewed The court wrote:

There can be no question that a religious organization can be found liable for punitive damages, if it has recklessly permitted an unfit employee or agent to sexually abuse minors with knowledge of his propensity to do so....

The court accepts that the Jesuits are a religious order with a rich history of service to the faithful.... However, the leaders of the Chicago Province fell far short of this ideal.  Plaintiffs have amply demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of proving facts at trial which would support an award of punitive damages.

SF Weekly reports on the decision.

Minister of Cannabis Church Sentenced To Prison On Drug Charges

In Franklin County, Pennsylvania on Wednesday, Robert Henry, a member of of the Hawaii Cannabis Ministry, was sentenced from 6 1/2 to 13 years in prison for directing marijuana growing from jail in 2010 when he was serving another sentence for drug violations. This time Henry was also fined $50,500 and ordered to go through a drug treatment program. Chambersburg (PA) Public Opinion reports that Henry claims he is being persecuted because of his religious beliefs.

Oregon Federal Judge Confirmed Over Objections To His Church-State Views

On Tuesday, the U.S. Senate, by a vote of 64-35, confirmed the nomination of Michael Simon as federal district judge for the district of Oregon. As reported by the Oregonian, Simon was originally nominated in 2010 and was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee. However the full Senate never voted on the nomination. President Obama renominated Simon this year and he was again approved by the Judiciary Committee by a vote of 14-4. The opposing votes were all from Republicans.  Simon is a cum laude graduate of the Harvard Law School, worked for the Justice Department and then joined a Portland law firm. However Republican opposition to his nomination stemmed from Simon's long association with the ACLU.  Here, from the debate in the Congressional Record, are excerpts from Senator Charles Grassley's speech on the Senate floor that focused in large part on Simon's church-state views:

Throughout his career, Mr. Simon has advocated on behalf of the American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon as a pro bono attorney. But his involvement in the ACLU goes beyond mere representation of a client. Mr. Simon has been a member of the ACLU of Oregon since 1986. He is an active member of their Lawyers’ Committee and served as a board member from 1997 to the year 2004, the vice president for legislation 1997 to 1998, and vice president for litigation from 2000 to 2004....

The ACLU does hold very liberal views, and Mr. Simon has been the voice for those views. For example, Mr. Simon wrote a letter to the Tillamook County Courthouse in Oregon expressing the ACLU’s concern with religious Christmas signs and decorations. The letter encouraged the county to repeal its resolution that deemed the county a ‘‘Merry Christmas County.’’

On issue after issue, Mr. Simon refused to disassociate himself from legal and policy positions held by the ACLU,that are far outside the mainstream. This includes the legalization of drugs, the unconstitutionality of the death penalty, the unconstitutionality of the Pledge of Allegiance, the ACLU’s opposition to tax exemptions for churches and extreme views regarding separation of church and state.....

Mr. Simon appears to demand an absolute wall of separation between church and state, as opposed to the U.S. Government promoting a specific religion. He has argued against religious displays on public land, against religious visitors to schools, against a coach praying with his football players. I assume that means even if you’re praying that they don’t get injured. Mr. Simon has argued that it is unconstitutional under the establishment clause to teach intelligent design in public school science classes.

British Schools Stop Teaching Religious Education As They Emphasize Ebacc Subjects

The Guardian reports today that a poll by the National Association of Religious Education Teachers shows that 25% of state secondary schools and 31% of state elementary schools in Britain are no longer teaching religious education, even though the law requires them to do so.  Offerings religious education have dropped off since schools have begun to be graded on student achievement in five English Baccalaureate (Ebacc) subjects: English; math; science; history or geography; and foreign language. (See prior related posting.)

Geert Wilders Acquitted of Defaming and Inciting Hatred Against Muslims

Dutch right-wing politician Geert Wilders was acquitted by an Amsterdam court yesterday of charges of group defamation against Muslims, and incitement to hatred and discrimination against Muslims based on their religion and race. Radio Netherlands reports on the verdict. At issue were statements made by Wilders on websites, Internet forums, Dutch newspapers and his film Fitna. (See prior posting.) An English translation of the court's press release on the case presents more details on the verdict.  The court held that criticism of a religion is permissible.  It went on to conclude that certain statements that might be seen as incitement to discrimination nevertheless are allowed "because of the context of the public debate" in which Wilders spoke "as a politician."  At the time the statements were made, problems of a multicultural society and immigration were being discussed.  Wilders statements "raised public problems" and "do not cross criminal legal boundaries."  Prosecutors had previously attempted to dismiss the charges on free speech grounds, but an appeals court ordered the prosecution to move ahead. (See prior posting.)  Now lawyers for those who filed complaints against Wilders are considering taking the case to the United Nations Human Rights Council or to the European Court.

In an op-ed in today's Wall Street Journal, Wilders reacts to his acquittal, saying in part:

Yesterday was a beautiful day for freedom of speech in the Netherlands. An Amsterdam court acquitted me of all charges of hate speech after a legal ordeal that lasted almost two years. The Dutch people learned that political debate has not been stifled in their country. They learned they are still allowed to speak critically about Islam, and that resistance against Islamization is not a crime.

DC Circuit Upholds Ban On Anti-Abortion Chalking Protest In Front of White House

In Mahoney v. Doe, (DC Cir., June 21, 2011), a 3-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld the constitutionality of D.C.'s Defacement Statute that, among other things, prohibits writing or drawing on public property without the consent of the person in charge of the property.  Plaintiffs were denied permission to carry out an anti-abortion sidewalk chalk demonstration in front of the White House.  The court rejected both overbreadth and "as applied" free expression challenges.  Focusing on the "as applied" challenge, the court said :

[T]he Defacement Statute is content neutral, and substantially justified by the District’s esthetic interest in combating ...the defacement of public property. Because the District did not curtail Mahoney’s means of expression altogether, and allowed him to protest in front of the White House in other ways, the Defacement Statute is not unconstitutional as applied.

The court also rejected plaintiffs' claim that enforcing the statute against them violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act because their protest was religiously motivated.  The court quoted prior precednt that held:

to make religious motivation the critical focus is . . . to read out of RFRA the condition that only substantial burdens on theexercise of religion trigger the compelling interest requirement.

Judge Kavanaugh also wrote a concurring opinion, declaring: "No one has a First Amendment right to
deface government property." (See prior related posting.)

French Fashion Designer On Trial For Anti-Semitic Tirade

AP reported yesterday that the trial of former Dior fashion designer John Galliano began yesterday. Galliano is charged with hurling anti-Semitic and racist remarks at strangers on two different occasions in a Paris cafe. French prosecutors are asking that Galliano be fined the equivalent of $14,400(US). Galliano says he remembers nothing of what he allegedly said. He was in the throes of serious alcohol and drug addiction at the time. (See prior related posting.)

Canadian Soccer Organization Says 15-Year Old Referee Cannot Wear Hijab

In Canada, Quebec's Soccer Federation has told a 15-year old Muslim girl that she cannot continue her summer job as a soccer game referee wearing her hijab (head scarf). Canadian Press reported yesterday that teenager Sarah Benkirane hopes to convince the Canadian Soccer Federation to put pressure on its  Quebec affiliate. The Quebec Federation says it is merely applying FIFA rules that bar officials from displaying personal, religious or commercial messages.

Lawsuit Challenges San Francisco Circumcision Ballot Measure

A lawsuit was filed in state court in California yesterday challenging the San Francisco ballot measure that seeks to ban circumcision.  The Los Angeles Jewish Journal reports that, while much attention has been directed to religious freedom concerns, this suit is based on a California Business and Professions Code, Sec. 460 which provides:

No city, county, or city and county shall prohibit a healing arts professional licensed with the state under Division 2 (commencing with Section 500) from engaging in any act or performing any procedure that falls within the professionally recognized scope of practice of that licensee.

Plaintiffs in the lawsuit include two Jewish community organizations, three Jewish families, one Muslim family and two doctors.  They allege that it would be misleading to include the proposal on the ballot if the city lacks the power to enact it.

UPDATE: Here is the full text of the complaint in Jewish Community Relations Council of San Francisco v. Arntz, (CA Super. Ct., filed 6/22/2011).

Atheists Complain Over Renaming of Brooklyn Street As "Seven In Heaven"

Monday's Brooklyn Paper reports that American Atheists has complained over the renaming of a portion of a Brooklyn, New York street to honor seven firefighters who were among those killed at the Twin Towers on 9-11.  The new street sign in honor of the men reads "Seven In Heaven Way." American Atheist spokesman David Silverman said: "It’s improper for the city to endorse the view that heaven exists. It links Christianity and heroism." Community Board 6 member Tom Miskel responded: "Almost every religion has some form of heaven. It’s not just specific to Christianity."

Australian Judge Acquits Woman Who Could Not Be Identified Because She Wore Burqa

A new debate over women wearing the burqa has broken out in Australia after a district court judge on Monday reversed a magistrate's conviction of a woman for filing a false police report.  Carnita Matthew was charged after a police video proved false a claim that police tried to tear her burqa off her face when she was stopped for  a random traffic breath test and then cited for improper display of her license plates. The judge reversed the conviction because the woman who filed the police report was wearing a burqa at the time and the court concluded that it could not be proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the woman was Ms. Matthew. He was also unconvinced that the woman filing the report knew it was false.  Australia's Telegraph, reporting on the case, says that Matthew has a long history of traffic tickets and non-payment of traffic fines. The government is considering a new requirement that anyone giving a report to police furnish a fingerprint along with their signature.  The government is waiting for the judge's full written opinion before deciding whether to appeal.

Groups Urge Obama To End Religious Hiring By Faith-Based Government Contractors

A group of 52 national organizations yesterday sent a letter (full text) to President Obama urging him to rescind an executive order issued in 2002 by President George W. Bush that allows religious organizations which contract with the government to nevertheless use religious criteria in their hiring. According to a press release from Americans United, yesterday was chosen as the day to send the letter because it was the 70th anniversary of the country's first executive order barring discrimination by federal government contractors.  That order, issued by Franklin Roosevelt, prohibited employment discrimination by defense contractors on the basis of race, creed, color, or national origin. (See prior related posting.)  [Thanks to Michael Lieberman for the lead.]

Argentina Court Says Title "Rabbi" Cannot Appear Next To Candidate's Name On Ballot

In Buenos Aires, Argentina, a court has ruled that a rabbi who is heading the PRO party's list of candidates for city legislature may not use the title "Rabbi" next to his name on the ballot. Bergman was picked by Mayor Mauricio Macri to head the party list.  Haaraetz reported Monday that even though Rabbi Sergio Bergman, a prominent leader of Argentina's Jewish community, is best known to the public as Rabbi Bergman, the court held that the title "rabbi" has a positive connotation and thus cannot appear next to Bergman's name as it is presented to voters.

Lawsuits Challenge County School Voucher Program

Two lawsuits were filed yesterday challenging on state constitutional and statutory grounds a pilot school voucher program enacted by the Douglas County, Colorado, Board of Education.  At issue is a program that will provide up to 500 students now enrolled in the county's public schools scholarships to attend approved Private School Partners. Of the schools approved for the program so far, 14 of 19 are sectarian religious schools. The first of the two lawsuits (press release) was filed by the ACLU and Americans United. The complaint (full text) in LaRue v. Colorado Board of Education, (CO Dist. Ct., filed 6/21/11), alleges that the Choice Scholarship Plan violates numerous provisions of the Colorado constitution dealing with education and religious neutrality, as well as the state's Public School Finance Act. A second similar lawsuit was filed by Taxpayers for Public Education, an organization of Colorado parents and taxpayers. (Press release). Education News Colorado reports on the lawsuits.

Court Upholds Constitutionality of RLUIPA Land Use Provisions

In Chabad Lubavitch of Lichtfield County, Inc. v. Borough of Lichtfield, Connecticut, (D CT, June 20, 2011), a Connecticut federal district court upheld the constitutionality of several of the land use provisions of RLUIPA.  This holding allowed Chabad to move ahead with its RLUIPA challenge to Lichtfield's denial of its application to restore and add onto a Victorian building located in an historic district. (See prior posting.) However the court held that Chabad's rabbi (as opposed to the organization) lacked standing to pursue a RLUIPA claim because he had no property interest in the building separate from Chabad's.

In discussing the constitutionality of RLUIPA, the court held that any substantial burden on Chabad's free exercise here would necessarily burden interstate commerce because of the building construction involved.  It also concluded that RLUIPA does not violate the Establishment Clause merely because it singles out religion for protection against unequal treatment. [Thanks to Eric Treene for the lead.]

Court Says First Amendment Precludes Jurisdiction Over Suit For Injuries During Healing Service

In Kubala v. Hartford Roman Catholic Diocesan, 2011 Conn. Super. LEXIS 1260 (CT Super. Ct., May 20, 2011), a Connecticut state trial court dismissed a lawsuit brought against a Catholic priest, his church and the Hartford Diocese seeking damages for injuries plaintiff received when, during a Catholic Charismatic Renewal healing service, she was physically injured.  When plaintiff was "prayed over" during the service, she fell backward, hitting her head and sustaining painful injuries. She claimed the injuries were the result of defendants failing to exercise the degree of care usual for such services. The court concluded that the  federal and state constitutions' free exercise and establishment clauses preclude it from deciding the case.  The claim is essentially one of clergy malpractice. "[S]ince the plaintiff's claims are inextricably intertwined with the religious context in which the incident occurred, the court cannot apply neutral principles of secular law to this case."

Free Exercise Challenge To Health Care Reform Law Dismissed In April Decision

Calvey v. Obama, (WD OK, April 26, 2011), while decided two months ago, has just now appeared on LEXIS and has received little general attention.  It is a decision on standing and ripeness of challenges by numerous plaintiffs in an Oklahoma federal district court to the constitutionality of last year's federal health care reform act. In dismissing some, but not all, of the claims, the court rejected a free exercise claim by plaintiffs who argued that the Affordable Care Act forces them to contribute to the funding of abortion in violation of their rights of conscience and free exercise of religion. The court wrote:

Plaintiffs have failed to identify a provision of the ACA that requires them to contribute to the funding of abortion, much less identified a provision of the ACA that requires them to purchase health insurance from an insurer that provides insurance coverage for abortions and/or that any part of the premiums the Plaintiffs will pay for health care insurance will necessarily be used, at least in part, to pay for abortions. Absent such allegations, Plaintiffs have failed to allege a future or threatened injury that is concrete and not conjectural or hypothetical or one which is fairly traceable to the ACA or the actions of the Defendants.

Egypt's Al-Azhar Calls For Modern Democratic Nation

In Egypt, Al-Azhar, the country's pre-eminent center of Sunni learning, issued a document calling for the country to be a modern democratic state.  According to reports from AlMasryAlYoum and Daily News Egypt, the document that was drafted by Al-Azhar and a number of Egyptian intellectuals defines the relationship between Islam and the state, and is considered to be a draft constitution. It provides that sharia law should remain "the essential source of legislation," but calls for Christians and Jews to have their own judicial tribunals. It calls for "the protection of places of worship for the followers of the three monotheistic religions" and considers "incitement of confessional discord and racist speech as crimes against the nation." It provides for care for all Egyptians without discrimination on the basis of gender or religion, and lists health, education and scientific research as priorities. In a news conference announcing the document, Al-Azhar's Grand Imam Sheikh Al-Tayeb also called for the independence of Al-Azhar, with its imam being elected by Muslim Senior Scholars Authority instead of being appointed by the government.