Suit Challenges North Carolina's Marriage Laws As Free Exercise and Establishment Violations

An unusual lawsuit was filed earlier this month in state court in North Carolina challenging North Carolina's statutes that require any marriage to be solemnized by a magistrate or a member of the clergy (GS Sec. 51-1) and prohibit them from solemnizing a marriage unless the couple has obtained a marriage license (GS Sec. 51-6). The complaint (full text) in Thigpen v. Cooper, (NC Super. Ct., filed 12/8/2011), alleges that (1) it violates the Establishment Clause for the state to make a member of the clergy an agent of the state to perform a marriage ceremony and submit a state granted license; (2) it violates state and federal free exercise protections for the state to require individuals entering into marriage to participate in a state-prescribed ceremony and licensing of the marriage; and (3) it is unconstitutional for the state to prohibit members of the clergy from solemnizing the marriage of same-sex couples. The complaint also alleges that the state's marriage requirements violate the personal liberty protections of the 14th Amendment and North Carolina's constitution. The Greensboro News-Record reported on the case last week.

Cert. Filed In San Diego State Christian Fraternity Lawsuit

A petition for certiorari (full text) was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday in Alpha Delta Chi- Delta Chapter v. Reed. In the case, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the facial constitutionality of a San Diego State University policy that denies recognition to any student group that restricts membership or eligibility to hold officer positions on the basis, among others, of religion. However, the court concluded that plaintiffs had raised a triable issue of fact as to whether the University applied the policy in a discriminatory manner in denying recognition to a Christian fraternity and sorority, while granting recognition to certain other groups that limit their membership. (See prior posting.) Alliance Defense Fund issued a press release announcing the cert. filing. ADF summarized its position as follows: "The university is not telling the Democratic club it must be led by a Republican, or the vegetarian club that it must be led by a meat-eater, but it is telling Christian groups that they must allow themselves to be led by atheists."

USCIRF Reauthorized For 3 Years, But 5 Current Commissioners Are Pushed Out

Congress on Friday gave final passage to HR 2867, the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom Reform and Reauthorization Act of 2011, reauthorizing USCIRF until September 30, 2014. Passage came as the Commission was preliminarily preparing to close down. Reauthorization had been stalled in the Senate because of a hold placed on the legislation by Illinois Senator Richard Durbin over an unrelated issue. (See prior posting.) Durbin insisted on amendments to the original House bill in order to lift his hold. After the Senate passed those on Tuesday, the House went along with them Friday. Two articles in World Magazine (1, 2), report in greater depth on the bill's journey through Congress.  Some supporters of USCIRF say that Durbin's amendments will impede the agency's work. In particular, they point to a provision that limits commissioners to two terms.  The terms of present commissioners who have served that length of time now will end in 90 days.  This will eliminate 5 of the 9 current commissioners-- those who have the most experience. The bill also calls on the Comptroller General to submit a wide-ranging evaluation of USCIRF within one year, including an examination of the relationship between the agency and the State Department's Ambassador at Large for International Religious Freedom.

UPDATE: Chairman Leonard Leo will apparently not be subject to the 90 day end of term requirements because, while he has been reappointed for a third time, his first appointment was not for a full term. This posting originally reported that, but briefly reflected the view that 6 members were affected when that was widely reported elsewhere.

New Jersey Court Awards Church Property To Parent Body; Congregants Locked Out For Christmas

The North Jersey Record reports that last week a New Jersey state Superior Court judge ruled that the property of the Community Church of Paramus belongs to the Metropolitan District of the Christian and Missionary Alliance, the church's parent body.  In 2009, the Alliance determined that the Paramus church should close because of declining membership, lack of leadership and financial difficulties. That triggered a clause in the Alliance's constitution that called for the church's property to revert to the Metropolitan District.  Community Church has owned its property since 1929. In 1996 it voted to join the Alliance, but amended its Constitution to reflect that only in 2000.  The court apparently concluded that the 1996 date was the crucial one that prevented the congregation from availing itself of a provision in the Alliance constitution that allows churches affiliated less than 10 years to reject the reversion clause. The Metropolitan District filed suit last year claiming that it was entitled to the property, and last week the court issued an order granting it possession and barring defendants from entering or occupying the property.  On Wednesday of this week, the Metropolitan District changed the locks on the church doors, locking the members out of their planned Christmas worship services. Deacon Peter Ferriero, upset with the decision, said: "We believe in the Lord and we believe this is a battle to expose the Christian and Missionary Alliance, how really what they're doing is stealing."

Defense Authorization Bill Passes With Conscience Protection For Chaplains

Bloomberg reports that Congress yesterday gave final approval to HR 1540, the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act. (Full text of Conference Report.) The bill now goes to the President for his signature. Section 544 of the bill provides:

A military chaplain who, as a matter of conscience or moral principle, does not wish to perform a marriage may not be required to do so.

The section responds to concerns by some that, with the end of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" in the military, chaplains may be pressured to perform same-sex marriages.  As reported by Mother Jones earlier this week, House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon failed in his efforts to include in the bill a total ban on military chaplains performing same-sex marriages.

1st Amendment Prevents Applying Anti-Stalking Law To Harassment of Religious Leader On Twitter

In United States v. Cassidy, (D MD, Dec. 15, 2011), a Maryland federal district court held that the First Amendment's protection of free expression precludes applying the federal anti-stalking statute (18 USC 2261A(2)(A)) to defendant's criticism of a Buddhist religious leader through his blog and through some 8,000  postings on Twitter. The Tweets criticize religious leader Alyce Zeoli and her Buddhist sect. Some involve threats directed at Zeoli. As reported yesterday by the New York Times, the government's indictment alleged that the anti-stalking statute was violated because the postings caused Zeoli substantial emotional distress. In striking down the statute as applied, the court pointed out that Zeoli is "an easily identifiable public figure that leads a religious sect." Many of the Tweets and postings related to the beliefs of her sect and her qualifications as a leader. "Thus this statute sweeps in the type of expression that the Supreme Court has consistently tried to protect."  The court emphasized that no one is forced to see what is posted by another person on a blog or Twitter.  According to the court: "This is in sharp contrast to a telephone call, letter or e-mail specifically addressed to and directed at another person, and that difference ... is fundamental to the First Amendment analysis in this case."

Suit Challenges Teacher's Reaction To Student's Anti-LGBT Beliefs

The Thomas More Law Center announced yesterday that it has filed a federal lawsuit against the Howell, Michigan Public School District on behalf of a high school student whose teacher removed him from class after he defended his Catholic religious views on homosexuality.  The complaint (full text) in Glowacki v. Howell Public School District, (ED MI, filed 12/14/2011) alleges that defendants violated plaintiff's free expression and equal protection rights.

Oct. 20, 2010 was Spirit Day at Howell High School-- an “anti-bullying” day on which students and faculty wear purple to stop homophobia.  The complaint alleges that "the purpose of the 'anti-bullying' day ... was to indoctrinate students into believing that homosexuality is normal and to shift the blame for the destructive lifestyle of homosexuals to those who believe it is wrong and immoral."

Plaintiff's run-in with his teacher began after the teacher told a female student wearing a Confederate flag belt buckle to remove it because it was offensive. Plaintiff raised his hand and asked the teacher why it was permissible to display a rainbow flag in support of LGBT rights that is offensive to some, but not a Confederate flag. The teacher asked plaintiff whether he supported gays, and plaintiff replied that his religion does not accept homosexuality.  The teacher, it is alleged, told plaintiff that his religion was wrong, and ordered him out of the classroom.

New York's High Court Rejects Suit By Former Parishioners Challenging Church Demolition

Section 5 of New York's Religious Corporations Law calls for approval by "members" of the corporation of certain decisions by the trustees of a religious corporation on use of the organization's property. In Blaudziunas v. Egan, (NY Ct. App., Dec. 13, 2011), former parishioners who objected to the Archbishop's decision to close their church and demolish it sued to enjoin the demolition.  They claim that under Section 5, the decision to demolish the church building must be authorized by the parishioners, who they claim are "members" of the church corporation. New York's highest court disagreed, calling that argument "unavailing." The court concluded that: "Pursuant to the by-laws, parishioners are members of the ecclesiastical body — not members of a corporation. Such status does not confer upon them the rights and duties as members of the religious corporation."

Azerbaijan Tightens Control Of Religious Activities

Forum 18 reports that on December 12, Azerbaijan's president signed into law amendments to the country's Criminal Code and Administrative Code that  increase the penalties for violation of various religious censorship laws and add new restrictions on religious practices. Distributing religious literature that has not been cleared by the state is now punishable by up to 2 years in prison and a fine of up to the equivalent of $8900 (US). Distribution of religious literature by foreigners has now been outlawed, as has sending citizens abroad to study religion without permission of the state. A new provision in the Administrative Code prohibits citizens who have gained their religious education outside of Azerbaijan from carrying out religious rituals and ceremonies of Islam. Numerous other changes are included in the new amendments as well. These changes are the 14th set of amendments to the religion laws in Azerbaijan since 2001.

Today Is Bill of Rights Day and Human Rights Week

Today is Bill of Rights Day, celebrating the 220th anniversary of the adoption of the U.S. Constitution's Bill of Rights-- including the First Amendment.  President Obama last week issued a Proclamation marking the occasion.    This week is also Human Rights Week, and Dec. 10 was Human Rights Day-- both marking the adoption in 1948 by the United Nations General Assembly of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The President also issued a Proclamation last week marking these observances.

State Department Hosts Conference On Implementing U.N. Freedom of Religion Resolution

As previously reported, in March the United Nations Human Rights Council, in a major policy shift encouraged by Western nations, unanimously adopted Resolution 16/18 on Freedom of Religion or Belief which omits any reference to the concept of "defamation of religion" and instead focuses on the individual's right to freedom of belief. On Monday, the U.S. State Department followed up on this by hosting the first implementation meeting of the Istanbul Process for Combating Intolerance and Discrimination based on Religion or Belief. (State Dept. Press Release). Speaking on the opening day of the 3-day meeting (full text of remarks), Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom Suzan Johnson Cook said in part:

We know that some people distort various religious doctrines to justify intolerance, foment violence, or create strife that serves their narrow political purposes. We must denounce offensive speech whenever we encounter it – but our commitment to universal principles makes clear that faith must never be a crime and religion must never be used as an excuse to stifle freedom of expression.

The meeting has been strongly criticized by some, such as this American Thinker article and this op-ed by Jonathan Turley, fearing it will further the "defamation of religion" agenda of the Organization of the Islamic Conference. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton responded to this criticism in part of her remarks at the State Department implementation meeting yesterday (full text):

Now I know that some in my country and elsewhere have criticized this meeting and our work with all of you. But I want to make clear that I am proud of this work, and I am proud to be working with every one of you. And I believe that this work is an affirmation of America’s values, but equally important an affirmation of universal values. Because we nor – no country individually has a monopoly on the truth, and we will do better when we live in peace with each other, when we live with respect and humility, and listen to each other. And it is important that we recognize what we accomplished when this resolution ended 10 years of divisive debate where people were not listening to each other anymore.

Now we are. We’re talking. We have to get past the idea that we can suppress religious minorities, that we can restrict speech, that we are smart enough that we can substitute our judgment for God’s and determine who is or is not blaspheming. And by bringing countries from around the world here, we are affirming our common humanity and our common commitment to defend and promote fundamental rights.

USCIRF Releases Report On Human Rights Violations In Sudan

Yesterday the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom released a report (full text) on the Sudanese government's violations of international human rights law in the Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile states that border the Republic of South Sudan.  Speaking at a press conference (full text of remarks), USCIRF Chairman Leonard Leo said that even after the Comprehensive Peace Agreement that led to the creation of South Sudan, President Omar al-Bashir is continuing to target people based on religion and ethnicity.

Court Says Defendant's Marijuana Use Was Not Religiously Motivated

In State of Idaho v. White, (ID App., Dec. 14, 2011), an Idaho state appeals court rejected defendant Cary White's claim that his marijuana use is protected by the Idaho Free Exercise of Religion Protected Act.  White's extensive testimony at an initial trial before a magistrate revealed both religious and non-religious reasons for his marijuana use. The magistrate concluded that; "White’s use of marijuana is more a matter of his belief in freedom, rather than a tenet of his religion." Reviewing that finding, the Court of Appeals concluded that:

there was substantial evidence for the magistrate to determine that, while White may have testified in a manner to link his marijuana use to legitimate religious beliefs and practices, this was more of an instance where he has utilized parts of various recognized religions “to meld into a justification for his use of marijuana” and did not ... establish a link between any recognized religious beliefs he may have and his marijuana use. Therefore, we conclude there was substantial and competent evidence to support the magistrate’s findings of fact that White’s marijuana use is not substantially motivated by a religious belief....

 Today's Idaho Statesman reports on the decision.

Florida Court Says Religious Freedom Amendment Ballot Language Is Misleading

Yesterday, a Leon County, Florida trial judge ruled off the 2012 ballot, at least temporarily, Florida's Amendment 7, the Religious Freedom Amendment.  In Shapiro v. Browning, (Cir. Ct. Leon Co. FL, Dec. 13, 2011), the court held that the a portion of the ballot summary language is ambiguous and misleading. The Amendment would repeal Florida's Blaine Amendment language that bars state aid to religious institutions and instead would permit religious institutions to participate in state programs on an equal basis with others. (See prior posting.) The language that the court found objectionable was the statement in the ballot summary that the amendment provides for participation in state programs by religious groups "consistent with the United States Constitution". In fact the amendment provides that the government may not deny participation to religious institutions "except to the extent required by the First Amendment."

The court's ruling however is subject to statutory mandate given to the state Attorney General to submit corrected revised ballot language within 10 days. (FL Stat. Sec. 101.161.)  The court upheld the constitutionality of the delegation of this authority to the Attorney General.  Yesterday's Palm Beach Post reports on the decision. [Thanks to FlaglerLive for the link to the decision.]

Scottish Parliament Passes Ban on Religious Hate Crimes and On Incitements At Football Matches

Yesterday Scotland's Parliament passed the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Bill by a vote of 64-57, according to BBC News.  As explained yesterday by The Guardian, the new law follows a series of sectarian threats and football-related violence earlier this year.

The full text of the final version of the new law is available online. It creates two new offenses.  First it bans incitement of public disorder based on hatred of a religious or racial group or on hatred relating to sexual orientation, nationality or disability. It covers such conduct at or while traveling to or from football matches.

Secondly, the new law more broadly bans threats of serious violence, or other threatening communications by a person intending to stir up hatred on religious grounds, whether or not related to football matches. However, a section designed to protect freedom of expression provides:

For the avoidance of doubt, nothing in section 5(5) prohibits or restricts— (a) discussion or criticism of religions or the beliefs or practices of adherents of religions, (b) expressions of antipathy, dislike, ridicule, insult or abuse towards those matters, (c) proselytising, or (d) urging of adherents of religions to cease practising their religions.

[Updated]

Reporter Follows Koshering of White House Kitchen For Hanukkah Reception

The Dining section of today's New York Times features an article titled Overnight Makeover for a Kosher First Kitchen. It reports on the several-hour frenzy of making the White House kitchen kosher so that food for the President's annual Hanukkah reception could be prepared there last week. (See prior related posting.) The article describes a "Lubavitch SWAT team of three rabbis and an intern."  At one point during the process, one of the rabbis "reviews a Hebrew passage from Shulchan Aruch, the venerable code of Jewish law. He finds it on his iPad."

Gingrich Iowa Staffer Resigns Over His Remarks About Mormonism

Yesterday's Des Moines Register reports that less than a week after he was hired, Newt Gingrich's political director for his Iowa campaign was forced to resign because of remarks he made about Mormons during a focus group in which he participated a day before he was hired. Craig Bergman told a focus group last Wednesday: "A lot of the evangelicals believe God would give us four more years of Obama just for the opportunity to expose the cult of Mormon. There’s a thousand pastors ready to do that." Both Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman are Mormons.

Saudis Execute Woman Convicted of Sorcery

On Monday, according to an AP report, Saudi Arabia executed a woman who had been convicted of practicing magic and sorcery. Chief of the religious police, Abdullah al-Mohsen, said the woman had tricked people into thinking she could treat illnesses. She charged $800 per session for her services. (See prior related posting.)

Dutch Senate Unlikely To Concur In Ban On Halal and Kosher Slaughter

Last June, the lower house of Netherlands' parliament overwhelmingly passed a bill that effectively would ban kosher and halal slaughter of animals. The bill did so by eliminating a provision in current law that exempts ritual slaughter from the requirement that animals be stunned before they are killed. (See prior posting.) While at that time it appeared that the Dutch Senate would go along with the lower house, now, according to an AP report, support of several parties, including Netherlands' two largest, seems to have disappeared.  While the Senate vote on the bill will not take place until Dec. 20, yesterday the Senate debated the bill.  Senator Nico Schrijver said the Labour party now has "many questions," and suggested that animal welfare could better be improved by aiming at conditions in large-scale industrial slaughter houses rather than at the small number of  ritual slaughterers. The VVD party which holds the largest number of seats in Parliament also now seems unlikely to support the proposal. VVD senator Sybe Schaap argued that the bill reflects "ethical absolutism".

Suit Challenges Crosses On Public Property of Tennessee Town

The Freedom From Religion Foundation announced last week that it has filed a federal lawsuit against the town of Whiteville, Tennessee and its mayor, James Bellar, challenging under the Establishment Clause several crosses put up on public property. The complaint (full text) in Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Town of Whiteville, Tennessee, (WD TN, filed 12/9/2011), recounts the sequence of events.  Initially FFRF complained about a cross that had been displayed on the town's water tower.  The mayor responded by merely removing one arm of the cross. (See prior posting.) At about the same time, the city installed two crosses in front of city hall and decorated them with Christmas wreaths. Also a cross was installed on a public sidewalk in front of the mayor's insurance company. Yesterday, Whiteville's mayor issued a statement (full text) criticizing the lawsuit. The mayor comments in part: "What is even more puzzling about this latest lawsuit is that this foreign company and its Nashville law firm have filed it in the federal court in Jackson, Tennessee, which abuts a public sidewalk on which sits government-owned light posts that, as we speak, are decorated by colorful banners depicting Christmas trees."