Step Toward Disestablishment of Church of Norway Taken

According to ENInews, last week a major step toward disestablishment of Norway's state church was taken. On March 16, the government in its weekly session with King Harald V formally agreed to proposals for changes in the country's Constitution and other church legislation. The proposals must still be passed by the Parliament (Storting). That is expected to happen in May or June. The Ministry of Government Administration, Reform and Church Affairs said that under the proposal, the provision in the Constitution that "the Evangelical Lutheran religion should remain the state's public religion" will be replaced with a provision that the state's basis will be "our Christian and Humanist heritage."  The appointment of bishops and other clergy will be transferred from the King to Church of Norway bodies. Government officials dealing with church affairs will no longer be required to be Church of Norway members. However, Church of Norway clergy will continue to be employed by the state.While the king will no longer be the "summus episcopus," the Constitution will provide that the king "shall continue to profess the Evangelical Lutheran religion."

Another Colorful Order Entered To Enforce Religion In School Settlement

Last month, a settlement was finally entered in a lawsuit challenging the Medina Valley, Texas Independent School District's plan to include student-led prayers in its graduation ceremony. The settlement dealt broadly with issues of religion in the public schools. (See prior posting.) A notable feature of the litigation has been the colorful memos and opinions issued by federal district judge Fred Biery.  That tradition continues as yesterday Judge Biery issued an order (full text) captioned "Non-Kumbaya Order: The Homo Sapien Saga Continues."

The settlement included a stipulation that: "School District Personnel will not disparage the Plaintiffs." However hours after the court approved the settlement agreement, the Superintendent gave a television interview calling the lawsuit a "witch-hunt." Subsequently disparaging comments were posted on Facebook by the school's band director.  That led plaintiffs to file a Motion to Enforce the Settlement Agreement and to Judge Biery's 7-page order which stated in part:

While Hollywood once proposed that "love means never having to say you're sorry," life and litigation offer more realistic approaches to resolving disputes and avoiding a lengthy court hearing on the allegations and responses presently before the Court. Surely, the parties and counsel have more constructive things to do.

The Court does not expect the parties to hold hands and sing "Kumbaya" around a campfire beside the Medina River. Nor does the Court expect the respondents ... to engage in a public spectacle of self-flagellation for communicating words better left unsaid. Moreover, the Court does not expect plaintiffs to become traditional Trinitarian Christians, though the Court suggests plaintiffs might follow the moral and civility lessons of Matthew 5:39 ("if someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also") and a portion of "Essay on Criticism" ("to err is human; to forgive, divine")....

Accordingly, respondents are given the opportunity, within ten days of this order, to sign the following statement, privately and personally.... "I apologize for statements I made, which were interpreted by plaintiffs as disparaging towards them. I will abide by the Settlement Agreement and Release entered on February 9, 2012."

.... Plaintiffs, within ten days of notification of respondents' signed statements, shall sign, privately and personally, with delivery to plaintiffs' counsel: "Your apology is accepted. I will abide by the Settlement Agreement and Release entered on February 9, 2012."

.... If the Court's suggestion is acted upon ...the Court will find that any alleged contempt by respondents has been purged. If no certification is received, the matter will be set for a show cause hearing.

Finally, the Court reminds the parties of the Fifth Amendment....While it is invoked for criminal prosecutions, its underlying premise is instructive for Homo sapien relationships in general: Trouble does not come from words unspoken, particularly in this age of e-mails, tweets, cameras and recorders.

San Antonio Express News reported on the order.

Venice Commission Criticizes Parts of Hungary's New Law On Legal Status of Churches

The Venice Commission is the Council of Europe's advisory body on constitutional law. Yesterday, responding to a request from the government of Hungary for an advisory opinion, the Commission issued a 15-page report on Hungary's 2011 Act On the Right to Freedom of Conscience and Religion and the Legal Status of Churches, Denominations and Religious Communities. (Full text). The Commission summarized its findings as follows:

107. As a whole, the Act constitutes a liberal and generous framework for the freedom of religion. However, although few in number, some important issues remain problematic and fall short of international standards.

108. The Act sets a range of requirements that are excessive and based on arbitrary criteria with regard to the recognition of a church. In particular, the requirement related to the national and international duration of a religious community and the recognition procedure, based on a political decision, should be reviewed. This recognition confers a number of privileges to churches concerned.

109. The Act has led to a deregistration process of hundreds of previously lawfully recognised churches, that can hardly be considered in line with international standards.

110. Finally, the Act induces, to some extent, an unequal and even discriminatory treatment of religious beliefs and communities, depending on whether they are recognised or not.

111. The Venice Commission was informed that - as a reaction to the draft opinion - the Government intends to introduce amendments, which is welcome. The Commission had no possibility to examine these proposals but it remains at the disposal of the Hungarian authorities for any further assistance.

AP reports on the Commission's opinion. (See prior related posting.)

Certiorari Denied In Clergy Abuse and College Student Organization Cases

The U.S, Supreme Court yesterday denied certiorari in two unrelated cases. It denied review in Doe v. Roman Catholic Archdiocese of St. Louis, (Docket No. 11-840, cert. den. 3/19/2012) (Order List). In the case, a Missouri appellate court rejected plaintiff's claim against the Archdiocese of St. Louis for intentional failure to supervise one of its priests who sexually abused plaintiff as a teenager.  The court held that under Missouri law, a duty to supervise arises only as to activity that takes place on Church premises or that occurs while the priest was using a chattle belonging to the church. It also followed Missouri precedent holding that the 1st Amendment bars assertion of tort claims against a religious institution based on its alleged negligence in supervising, retaining, or hiring sexually abusive clerics. (See prior posting.) Bloomberg News reports on the Supreme Court's denial of review.

The Supreme Court also denied review in Alpha Delta Chi- Delta Chapter v. Reed, (Docket No. 11-744, cert. den. 3/19/2012) (Order List). In the case, the 9th Circuit 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 9th Circuit 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.) The San Francisco Chronicle reports on the Supreme Court's denial of certiorari.

Pakistani Police Officer Gets Life In Prison For Blasphemy

Pakistan Today reports that on Friday a court in the Pakistani city of Kasur imposed a life sentence and a fine equivalent to $2200 (US) for blasphemy on Police Station House Officer Manzarul Haq Shah Jahan.  The complaint against Jahan, alleging violation of Sec. 295C of the Pakistan Penal Code, was filed by Muhammad Younis who said that in a conversation about street crime with him and two others, Jahan had used blasphemous words against the Prophet Muhammad. Before filing the complaint, Younis discussed the incident with 65 members of a mosque. Several religious scholars have also issued fatwas against Jahan.

Diocese Loses On 1st Amendment Defense To Negligent Supervision Suit

AP reported last week that a state trial judge in Pulaski County, Arkansas has rejected a 1st Amendment defense by the Roman Catholic Diocese of Little Rock and has held that plaintiff Shannon Oates may sue the diocese for negligent supervision of a priest and failure of the diocese to protect her. Oates, who is 41, claims she was lured into a romantic and sexual relationship with Fr. Charles Kanu beginning in 2009 as he acted as her mentor in her conversion to Catholicism. The suit alleges that the diocese knew or should have known what Kanu was doing. Kanu is not named as a defendant in the case.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Amy Bowers and Kristen A. Carpenter, Challenging the Narrative of Conquest: The Story of Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Association, (Indian Law Stories, Carole Goldberg, Kevin K. Washburn, Philip P. Frickey, eds., Foundation Press, 2011).
• Matthew L. M. Fletcher, Resisting Congress: Free Speech and Tribal Law, (The INdian Civil Rights Act at Forty, Kristen A. Carpenter, Matthew L.M. Fletcher, Angela R. Riley eds., UCLA American Indian Studies Center, 2012).
• Michael A. Helfand, Litigating Religion, (Boston University Law Review, Vol. 92, 2012).
• Mark Rienzi, The Constitutional Right Not to Kill, (March, 17 2012).
• Robin L. West, A Marriage is a Marriage is a Marriage: The Limits of Perry v. Brown, (Harvard Law Review Forum, Vol. 125, pp. 47-53, 2012).
• Ali Manzo Usman, Social Human Rights In Islam and the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (U.D.H.R 1948): Comparative Study, (OIDA International Journal of Sustainable Development, Vol. 3, No. 5, pp. 39-46, 2012).

From SmartCILP:

• Robert H. Nelson, Rethinking Church and State: The Case of Environmental Religion, 29 Pace Environmental Law Review 121-217 (2011).
• Intisar A. Rabb, The Islamic Rule of Lenity: Judicial Discretion and Legal Canons, 44 Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 1299-1351 (2011).
• Alexander Volokh, Do Faith-Based Prisons Work? 63 Alabama Law Review 43-95 (2011).
• Sharia, Family, and Democracy: Religious Norms and Family Law in Pluralistic Democratic States. Foreword by John Witte, Jr.; articles by Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na'im, Ann Laquer Estin, Natan Lerner, Rosalind I.J. Hackett, Abdulmumini A. Oba, Eyene Okpanachi, Abdul-Fatah Kola Makinde, Philip Ostien, M. Christian Green, Joel A. Nichols, Pascale Fournier, Yuksel Sezgin and T W Bennett. 25 Emory International Law Review 779-1059 (2011).

Rabbi Ordered To Jail For Religious Refusal To Testify To Grand Jury

According to the Los Angeles Times last week, a California federal district court judge who has found Hasidic rabbi Moshe Zigelman in contempt for refusal to testify has ordered Zigelman to be jailed on March 21.  Zigelman has already served a prison term for tax evasion by his New York-based Spinka sect.  After his release from prison, he was subpoenaed to appear before a grand jury to testify in the continuing probe of the tax scheme. However, Zigelman refused, citing the Jewish principle of mesira-- the variously interpreted ban on informing civil authorities that a fellow-Jew is violating the law. Zigelman will remain in jail for a maximum of 18 months, or less if he decides to testify.  (See prior related posting.)

California AG Rules Madonna Mosaic On Public Land Would Be Unconstitutional

U-T San Diego reported last week that California's Attorney General has issued an Opinion (March 7, 2012) (full text) concluding that it would violate the "No Preference" clause (Art. 1, Sec. 4) of the California Constitution for the California Department of Parks and Recreation to permit the city of Encinitas to install the "Surfing Madonna" mosaic on state property at Moonlight State Beach.  According to an AP article last year, which carries a photo of the glass mosaic, the mosaic was placed under a train bridge in Encinitas. However technically it was graffiti. When Encinitas began steps to remove the mosaic, its creator, Mark Patterson, identified himself and reached an agreement with the city to remove the mosaic so it could be installed elsewhere. This is descried in a California Catholic Daily article of Feb. 12. In a comment that Patterson posted online to this California Catholic Daily article, he described his inspiration for creating it. The content of the post became important to the Attorney General's ruling.

The Attorney General said in part:

... Mr. Patterson's attorney has asserted that  the mosaic has a purely secular message ("Save the Ocean") and that Mr. Patterson was using the image of the Virgin of Guadalupe as a means of conveying that message. However, this assertion is inconsistent with Mr. Patterson's own description of how he came to adopt the image as a part of his mosaic. In the quotation above from the comment he posted on California Catholic Daily,  he states that the Virgin "appeared" to him on several occasions. Her message to him was to save the oceans....

Because the image of the Virgin of Guadalupe is central to the mosaic, an objective observer would conclude that Parks wished to convey a message related to that potent symbol of Catholicism. And even if the message is one of saving the oceans, it is the Virgin who is stating the message

Cyprus and Church of Cyprus Reach Tax Agreement

Cyprus Mail reports the the Holy Synod of the Church of Cyprus last Friday approved a tax agreement with the government of Cyprus that will bring millions of Euros into the country's dwindling coffers this year. The country's cabinet already approved the deal last Wednesday, and the Church agrees to be bound by it now, rather than waiting for parliamentary approval. The agreement is based on a 2005 agreement that was never ratified by the Cabinet, but includes several changes from the 2005 draft. According to Voice of Russia, the main feature is an agreement that the Church in the future will pay taxes when buying, selling or exchanging real estate. The government gives up claims for tax arrears by the Church, while clergy will no longer get duty-free autos. The church plans transactions this year which will generate 20 to 30 million Euros in tax revenue.  Finance Minister Kikis Kazamias thanked the Church for delaying one large transaction until after the agreement was finalized so that it would generate revenues for the government.

Pressure To Include Shariah Law In New Constitution Grows In Tunisia

In the wake of Tunisia's Arab Spring revolution last year, the country's Parliament is in the midst of drafting a new constitution. As CNS News reported earlier this month, pressure is growing to enshrine Shariah law as the principal source of legislation in the new constitution, despite Tunisia's secular history and statements last year by the head of the moderate Islamic Ennahda party that won 40% of the seats in Parliament that the Constitution would not mention Islamic law. (See prior posting.) According to Reuters, last month the Popular List, the party with the third largest block in Parliament, proposed a draft constitution that called for Shariah to be the principal source of Tunisia's legislation. Now, last Friday, thousands of Tunisians rallied outside of parliament demanding that the new constitution specify Islam as the state religion and Shariah as the principal source of legislation.  World Bulletin reports that the demonstration was organized by a coalition of religious organizations known as the Islamic Front. Ennahda did not participate in the demonstration.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Copeland v. Livingston, (5th Cir., March 13, 2012), the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected an inmate's challenge to his 6-month ban from prison religious gatherings after he caused a disturbance by refusing to leave a Muslim meeting in the prison chapel. It also dismissed his challenge to the monitoring or religious meetings and the presence of Christian symbols in the chapel.

In Golden v. Cates, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30901 (ED CA, March 8, 2012), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed, with leave to amend, a prisoner's complaint that he has been denied a kosher meal and required to work on the Sabbath.

In Washington-El v. Beard, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30489 (WD PA, March 7, 2012), a Pennsylvania federal district court dismissed an inmate's complaint that his requests for a copy of the Koran and his requests to participate in Islamic congressional meetings and services were rejected. His claim under RLUIPA was dismissed with prejudice, but he was given an opportunity to file an amended complaint as to his 1st Amendment free exercise claim. The magistrate's recommendation in the case is at 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30482 (Feb. 3, 2012).

In Lenhart v. Pennsylvania, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30447 (WD PA, March 7, 2012), a Pennsylvania federal district court dismissed, with leave to amend as to some defendants, plaintiff's claim that as a pre-trial detainee he was denied access to a Catholic priest. The magistrate's recommendations in the case are at 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30444 (Jan. 12, 2012).

In Collman v. Skolnik, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29986 (D NV, March 6, 2012), a Nevada federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30011, Jan. 26, 2012), and permitted a death row inmate to proceed with a number of his claims regarding delay in allowing him clergy visits from clergy of the Philadelphia Church of God (PCG), audio monitoring of these visits initially, delay in allowing him a full immersion baptism and failure to recognize PCG as a faith group.

In Williams v. Roberts, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30468 (ND NY, March 7, 2012), a New York federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153917, Dec. 15, 2011) and dismissed an inmate's claims that he was wrongfully disciplined for not complying with count procedures because at the time he was engaged in prayer as required by the tenets of the Nation of Islam.

In Ramon v. Dretke, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31428 (ED TX, March 8, 2012), a Texas federal district court  adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31522, Jan. 3, 2012) and dismissed an inmate's complaint that when he sought access to a Catholic priest, the prison chaplain told him it would take too much time to arrange for a priest to assist him with partaking of the sacraments. Plaintiff has now been transferred to a status that permits attendance at religious services.

In Knight v. Thompson, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31288 (MD AL, March 8, 2012), an Alabama federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (set out in Limbaugh v. Thompson, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153964, July 11, 2011) and dismissed claims of Native American inmates that that state policies restricting inmate hair length violate RLUIPA.

In Durbin v. Cain, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32159 (MD LA, March 8, 2012), a Louisiana federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31882, Feb. 16, 2012)  and dismissed a Jewish inmate's claim regarding refusal to allow him to celebrate Jewish holidays, but permitted him to proceed with his complaint that he was transferred to a prison outcamp where he is limited in his ability to practice his religion and meet together with members of his faith.

In Smith v. Cain, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32144 (MD LA, March 8, 2012), a Louisiana federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31876, Feb. 14, 2012) and referred back for an evidentiary hearing an inmate's petition to withdraw a previous settlement of a claim against prison officials that he was forced to listen to religious programming on the prison radio and TV network and that the Establishment Clause was violated when a Baptist Bible College was established on prison grounds. Plaintiff claims he signed the prior settlement agreement under physical threats from the warden.

In Mohamad v. Smith, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32478 (WD PA, March 12, 2012), a Pennsylvania federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing an inmate's constitutional and RLUIPA claims that his kufi was wrongfully removed for the taking of his inmate ID photo.

In Ruiz v. Adamson, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32971 (ND IL, March 8, 2012), an Illinois federal district court allowed an inmate to proceed with various claims stemming from the prison chaplain's refusal of his request to change his religious designation to House of Yahweh and to receive a kosher diet.

Tennessee AG OKs Excluding Religious Groups From Partnering With Homeland Security Department

The Tennessee legislature has pending before it companion bills, SB 2237 and HB 2375, that would authorize the state's Department of Safety and Homeland Security to promote its goals by entering partnership agreements with non-profit organizations.  The state's Attorney General has issued Opinion No. 12-29 (March 2, 2012), concluding that a proposed amendment to the bills that would exclude partnership agreements with political or religious non-profits (and their affiliates) is constitutionally defensible. As to religious non-profits, the Attorney General's opinion concludes:

All religious and religious-affiliated nonprofit organizations are treated the same and are excluded. On its face, this exclusion does not appear to be based upon any hostility toward religion, but rather can be characterized as an attempt to avoid an excessive entanglement or improper affiliation with religion.... [T]he pending legislation mandates numerous requirements applicable to the “nonprofit partners”.... These on-going requirements could be construed as being an excessive entanglement or improper affiliation between the Department of Safety and Homeland Security and a religious or religious-affiliated organization....

[Thanks to Eugene Volokh via Religionlaw for the lead.] 

Coptic Pope Shenouda Dies As Egypt Goes Through Important Transition

The New York Times reports that long-time head of the Coptic Orthodox Church in Egypt, Pope Shenouda III, died Saturday after a long illness. His death comes at a critical time for the 10 million Coptic Christians in Egypt as their country goes through a political transition in which the formal role of Islam is still uncertain. In a statement offering condolences, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton called Shenouda "an advocate for national unity and religious cooperation." President Obama issued a statement, saying in part: "We stand alongside Coptic Christians and Egyptians as they honor his contributions in support of peace and cooperation."

Indiana Supreme Court Grants Direct Appeal of Trial Court's Decision In School Voucher Case

The Indiana Supreme Court yesterday (March 16) issued an order (full text) in Meredith v. Daniels allowing the parties to skip the intermediate appellate court and take a direct appeal to the state Supreme Court of a trial court's decision upholding Indiana's Choice Scholarship school voucher program. NWI Times reports on the court's action. The case involves claims by 12 plaintiffs that the voucher program violates state constitutional provisions that bar the use of tax funds for religious institutions and which require a general and uniform system of common schools. (See prior posting.)

Religious Discrimination In Employment Claims Filed or Decided This Week Involve Multiple Faiths

In recent days, several cases involving refusal of employers to accommodate employees' religious beliefs have been filed or decided. In Rumfola v. Total Petrochemical USA, Inc., (MD LA, March 13, 2012), a Louisiana federal district court held that a jury question exists as to whether an employer would have suffered "undue hardship" if it allowed an employee, a member of the Living Church of God, to take off on Friday night and Saturday for religious reasons during a production plant turnaround process. [Thanks to CCH Employment Law Daily via Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

The Detroit News reported earlier this week on a federal lawsuit filed by a Jewish dentist against the Dearborn, Michigan dental office that employed him. Dr. Mark Ellis claimed that his employer accommodated religious practices of Muslim employees, while rejecting or reluctantly granting similar accommodation to him.  Ellis says he was advised against wearing a yarmulke (ead covering) and Tzitzit (ritual fringes) during work hours because the dental office had many Arabic patients.However Muslim dentists could wear head coverings and other religious clothing.  Midwest Dental also constantly harassed Ellis about leaving early on Friday, even though it permitted Muslim dentists an extra hour at lunch to attend Friday prayers.

Aol Jobs reported this week that 8 Musliim cab drivers in Orlando, Florida are filing complaints with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that their employer, Star Taxi, threatened they would be fired if they were caught praying at any of the company's service stations, even though employees of religions are4 permitted to take a break to pray or read religious material.

New Compromise Proposed By Government On Contraceptive Coverage By Religious Non-Profits' Insurance Policies

In a news release yesterday, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Labor Department and the Department of the Treasury announced that they were issuing an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to once more try to find an acceptable compromise with religiously affiliated institutions on the issue of contraceptive coverage in health care policies made available to their employees and (for colleges) their students. The Advance Notice takes several steps to try to meet concerns expressed, particularly by Catholic institutions.

First it makes clear the the narrow definition of religious employer used for the previously announced religious exemption from the contraception coverage mandate is intended only for purposes of the coverage requirements enacted by the Affordable Care Act:

Whether an employer is designated as “religious” for these purposes is not intended as a judgment about the mission, sincerity, or commitment of the employer, and the use of such designation is limited to defining the class that qualifies for this specific exemption. The designation will not be applied with respect to any other provision of the PHS Act, ERISA, or the Code, nor is it intended to set a precedent for any other purpose.

The Advance Notice reiterates the Administration's previous proposal calling for insurance companies to furnish contraceptive coverage directly, at no additional cost, for employees of non-profit religious institutions that have religious objections to financing such coverage.  The Advance Notice then moves on to tackle the problem of contraceptive coverage for the many non-profit religious organizations that self-insure, and thus lack an insurance company to furnish coverage. For these organizations, the third-party administrator of the group health plan or some other independent entity would arrange and finance contraceptive coverage.  Religious non-profit groups would only have to self-certify their eligibility. The Advance Notice suggests a number of sources for revenue for the third-party administrator to use in providing the coverage.

The New York Times reports on the new proposal and says that it "virtually guarantees that birth control will remain an issue in the battle for the White House and Congress." [Thanks to Jonathan Adler at Volokh Conspiracy for the lead.]

Britain Begins Consultation Process On Same-Sex Civil Marriage

Yesterday, Britain's Home Office launched a Consultation seeking public input on how to provide equal access to civil marriage for same-sex couples. According to the 25-page consultation document (full text), the government's proposals are designed to:

• enable same-sex couples to get married through civil ceremonies.

• retain civil partnerships for same-sex couples, including the ability to have a civil partnership registration on religious premises (on a voluntary basis and retaining the ban on any religious elements forming part of the registration).

• allow transsexual people to change their legal gender without having to legally end their existing marriage or civil partnership.

• make no changes to how religious marriages are solemnized.

Expanding on the issue of religious marriage, the consultation document says:

marriages solemnized through a religious ceremony and on religious premises would still only be legally possible between a man and a woman. The Government is not seeking to change how religious organisations define religious marriage and any subsequent legislation would be clear that no religious organisation could conduct a religious marriage ceremony on religious premises for same-sex couples.

Annex B of the document sets out specific consultation questions. Interested parties have until June 14 to file responses and comments on the proposals.  BBC News reports on these developments.

South Africa's Chief Justice Criticized For Inviting Judges To Evangelical Presentation

Today's Mail & Guardian is one of a number of South African media outlets covering criticism of an e-mail sent on behalf of South Africa's chief justice, Mogoeng Mogoeng, to chief judges around the country urging them to attend a leadership conference presented by American evangelist and motivational speaker John C. Maxwell.  Apparently none of the invited judges in fact attended the conference (which involved an attendance fee), but calls are being made for the Judicial Service Commission to censure Mogoeng. Mogoeng is is a lay preacher at the Winners Chapel International Church, and his appointment last year as chief justice was controversial because of his apparent views on homosexuality and the role of women. (See prior posting.)

UPDATE: SAPA reports (3/18) that the Heads of Courts say they have full confidence in Mogoeng.

Rape Victim Denied Anti-Conception Pill By Religious Jail Guard States Claim

In R.W. v. Spinelli, (MD FL, March 6, 2012), a Florida federal district court held, in a case involving rather unusual facts, that a rape victim can maintain a suit for violation of her privacy and equal protection rights against a jail employee.  Plaintiff was prescribed anti-conception pills at a rape crisis center where she took one and was instructed to take the second 12 hours later.  While police, investigating the rape, accompanied the victim back to the crime scene, they discovered that there was an outstanding arrest warrant against her. They arrested her, and when she was taken into custody the second pill she had with her was confiscated.  The next morning when she asked defendant Spinelli, the jail worker in charge of decisions involving her care, for the pill, Spinelli refused saying it was against her (Spinelli's) religious beliefs to administer it. Ultimately, just prior to her release the next day, plaintiff was permitted to take the second pill, and she did not become pregnant.

The court, while permitting plaintiff to move ahead, warned that at most she would receive only nominal damages of $1. It also expressed some question about whether plaintiff's equal protection allegations were well-founded. She alleged that Spinelli would have given the same contraceptive to male inmates undergoing sex change. The court dismissed plaintiff's claims against the sheriff in his official capacity. Courthouse News reports on the decision.