Monday, May 21, 2012

Poland's Agriculture Minister Rejects Challenge To Ritual Slaughter

Poland's Agricultural Minister Marek Sawicki said last week that he rejects demands of animal rights activists to end kosher and halal slaughter in Poland.  He says that ritual slaughter is permitted under European Union law, and that banning it would be inconsistent with Poland's constitutional protection of religious freedom  According to JTA, the minister of agriculture has exempted ritual slaughter from the requirement that animals be stunned before slaughter. Activists have asked the country's prosecutor to determine if this violates Polish law. In connection with the controversy, a Polish newspaper charges that the slaughterhouses where ritual slaughter is performed are owned by a colleague of the Agriculture Minister.

Canon Lawsuit Planned Against Georgetown University Over Deviations From Doctrine

CNA yesterday reported on the petition posted online at the website  of the newly formed Father King Society to Make Georgetown Honest, Catholic and Better. Founded by Georgetown alumnus William T. Blatty, author of the best-selling book The Exorcist, the organization is seeking to file a canon law lawsuit seeking a declaration that Georgetown University is no longer entitled to call itself Catholic or Jesuit, or alternatively seeking a Visitation to correct what is described as the University's:
twenty-one year refusal to comply fully with the law of the Church through the implementation of the general norms of Ex corde Ecclesiae and its eleven year non-compliance with certain particular norms adopted for the United States, which has led directly and indirectly to the tolerance and promotion of deviations from authentic doctrinal and moral teachings by Georgetown University authorities and a long series of Scandals to the faithful through actions inconsistent with a Catholic identity.
The organization's website details more specifically Blatty's concerns. The planned canon lawsuit was announced on the same day the HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius-- a controversial figure among Catholic institutions-- spoke at an awards ceremony during Georgetown's commencement weekend.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:
From SmartCILP:

Sunday, May 20, 2012

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Mitchell v. Quarterman, (5th Cir., May 15, 2012), the 5th Circuit rejected an inmate's religious objections to a prison's policy of permitting female guards to monitor male inmates while they shower and use the rest room.

In Miller v. Collier, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67562 (D MD, May 15, 2012), a Maryland federal district court rejected a claim by an inmate who had been involuntarily committed to a psychiatric hospital that his free exercise rights were violated by the temporary confiscation of a cross pendant and a metal rope necklace. The cross was later returned to him on a string.

In Taylor v. Hubbard, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67853 (ED CA, May 15, 2012), a California federal magistrate judge permitted an inmate to proceed with his free exercise and RLUIPA challenges to prison rules that prevented him from having tobacco to use in his Wheel of Love Ceremony. The rules limited him to purchasing religious products from a single vendor, limited the amount that could be purchased, and prohibited him from having tobacco in his cell or on his person.

In Jackson v. Thomas, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67821 (CD CA, May 15, 2012), a California federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation to dismiss (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67838, April 24, 2012), agreeing that an inmate sentenced to a state hospital as a sexually violent predator had not substantiated his allegation that he was denied the right to attend religious services during the period that his access level was reduced.

In Solomon v. Department of Financial Services, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67479 (ND FL, May 15, 2012), a Florida federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2012 U.S. Dist LEXIS 67480, April 9, 2012) and dismissed a suit in which an inmate claimed 8th Amendment and free exercise violations after he developed paranoia about prison food following an incident in which he found meat mixed in with his supposedly vegan food.

In Gillum v. Cate, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68661 (ED CA, May 16, 2012), a California federal magistrate judge rejected an inmate's habeas corpus petition in which the inmate claimed that the California Board of Parole Hearings violated the Establishment Clause by denying him parole based on his failure to attend a religious-based Alcoholics Anonymous program. Petitioner had not objected to attending, and he could have attended alternative programs.

In Doss v. Maples, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68292 (ED AR, May 16, 2012), an Arkansas federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68294, Feb. 29, 2012) and permitted an inmate to proceed with her free exercise and equal protection challenges to the prison mail room's seizing her copy of "Strong's Concordance," which she needs to practice her religious beliefs.

In Mootry v. Flores, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68615 (ED CA, May 15, 2012), a California federal magistrate judge recommended permitting a Muslim inmate to proceed with his free exercise claim that Muslim prisoners were denied Jumu'ah services. Dismissal was recommended as to various other claims, including failure to provide a Muslim or inmate chaplain.

In Sweet v. Northern Neck Regional Jail, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68513 (ED VA, April 18, 2012), a Virginia federal district court rejected a Muslim inmate's challenge to a jail policy that prohibits Muslims from praying in Arabic when inmates from different housing units and of different security levels are together.

Article Explores Impact of Mormonism On Romney's Political Beliefs

Today's New York Times carries a long front-page article on the importance to presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney of his Mormon religious faith.  Romney's views in numerous areas are depicted as an application of Mormon religious teachings to the secular realm:
Mr. Romney’s penchant for rules mirrors that of his church, where he once excommunicated adulterers and sometimes discouraged mothers from working outside the home. He may have many reasons for abhorring debt, wanting to limit federal power, promoting self-reliance and stressing the unique destiny of the United States, but those are all traditionally Mormon traits as well.
Outside the spotlight, Mr. Romney can be demonstrative about his faith: belting out hymns... while horseback riding, fasting on designated days and finding a Mormon congregation to slip into on Sundays, no matter where he is....
... [W]holesomeness is deeply authentic to Mr. Romney, whose spiritual life revolves around personal rectitude. In Mormonism, salvation depends in part on constantly making oneself purer and therefore more godlike....
Having a higher purpose is part of what motivates Mr. Romney, many of those close to him say, and gives him the wherewithal to suffer the slings and arrows of political life..... And while voters tend to see Mr. Romney as immensely fortunate, those close to him say that he never forgets he is a member of an oft-derided religious minority. 

Muslim Summer Camp Entitled To Tax Exemption

In Camp Retreats Foundation, Inc. v. Township of Marathon, (MI App., May 15, 2012), a Michigan state appellate court reversed the state's Tax Tribunal and found that a Muslim summer camp is entitled to a property tax exemption as a charitable institution.  The Tax Tribunal had held that the camp primarily promoted sports and recreation. The court disagreed, finding that the camp qualified under the definition of a charity:

Despite the articles' emphasis on athletic activities for youth, Camp Retreats' central focus is on providing the Islamic community with religious experience in a camp environment..... Contrary to the Tribunal’s reasoning, the presence of fences on the property and signs warning against trespassing bear no relationship to whether Camp Retreats offers its charity generally and without restriction.
Volokh Conspiracy has more on the case. [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

Saturday, May 19, 2012

2 New USCIRF Appointments Announced

According to a press release issued on Thursday by the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom two new appointments to the 9-member Commission have recently been made. On May 11, President Obama announced his appointment of the Reverend William J. Shaw to his second term on the Commission.  On May 15, Speaker of the House John Boehner announced his appointment of lawyer and foreign policy expert Elliott Abrams.

Friday, May 18, 2012

Contribution To Church Denied Deductibility For Inadequate Receipt

In Durden v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, (T.C., May 17, 2012), the U.S. Tax Court denied a $25,171 tax deduction for contributions to the Nevertheless Community Church made in 2007 by David and Veronda Durden. While the taxpayers produced records of their contributions, including canceled checks, the IRS denied the deduction for failure to comply with Sec. 170 of the Internal Revenue Code.  That section, and regulations under it, require an acknowledgement of the contribution from the charity dated before the return was filed or due. The acknowledgement must indicate the amount contributed and whether the charitable organization provided any goods or services in return for the contribution.  Taxpayers had an acknowledgement from the Church dated January 2008 (before their return was filed), but the acknowledgement failed to indicate whether goods or services had been provided.  They also had a second acknowledgement that did indicate no goods and services were provided, but that acknowledgement was dated June 2009 (after their return had been filed). [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

Court Rejects Compelled Religious Speech Challenge To Oklahoma License Plates

In Cressman v. Thompson, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68236 (WD OK, May 16, 2012), and Oklahoma federal district court rejected a claim by an Oklahoma driver that the picture on the state's standard license plates compel him to express a message contrary to his religious beliefs.  The plates carry the image of a statue of a Native American shooting an arrow into the sky. Plaintiff alleges that the image retells the story of a Native American who believed in multiple deities, the divinity of nature and the ability of humans to use sacred objects to convince gods to alter nature. The court concluded, however:
A reasonable viewer simply could not glean a religious message from the Native American image on the license plate or impute such to the driver. Observers of the image "are presented with a symbol that has various and somewhat imprecise ideas associated with it." ... They are not presented with a "particularized message" that is likely, much less highly likely to be "understood by those who view[] it."

European Court Upholds Spain's Firing of Married Priest As Teacher

In Fernández Martínez v. Spain, (ECHR, May 15 2012), (opinion in French, English press release) the European Court of Human Rights in a Chamber judgment (which is appealable to the Grand Chamber) upheld the decision not to renew the contract of a priest to teach religion in a Spanish state high school.  The action was taken by the local bishop after it was publicly disclosed that the priest, who had been granted a dispensation from the requirement of celibacy (he was married with 5 children), was a member of the Movement for Optional Celibacy. The court rejected the priest's argument that the protections of respect for his private life in Art. 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights invalidated the contract termination.  The court, instead, that the Church's freedom of religion (Art. 9) takes precedence, and (according to the press release): "The requirements of the principles of religious freedom and neutrality precluded it from carrying out any further examination of the necessity and proportionality of the decision not to renew his teaching contract." Turtle Bay and Beyond blog reports on the decision. [Thanks to Alliance Alert for the lead.]

Kuwait's Emir Blocks Proposed Constitutional Amendment Requiring Islamic Law

According to a report today in The Peninsula, the Emir of Kuwait-- whose approval is needed for any constitutional change-- has blocked a proposal to amend the constitution to require all Kuwaiti legislation to comply with Islamic law.  The amendment was put forward by the Islamic Justice Block in Parliament in a proposal signed by 31 of Parliament's 50 members. Kuwait's Constitution (Art. 2) already provides that : "The religion of the State is Islam, and the Islamic Shari'a shall be a main source of legislation." 85% of Kuwait's population is Muslim.

2nd Circuit Creates Fact-Specific Test For Constitutionality of Prayer At City Council Meetings

In Galloway v. Town of Greece, (2d Cir., May 17, 2012), the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, in a case of first impression for it, created an extremely fact-dependent test for determining the constitutionality of opening meetings of legislative bodies with prayer. Here the court held that the prayer policy as implemented by Greece, New York, violates the Establishment Clause because "an objective, reasonable person would believe that the town’s prayer practice had the effect of affiliating the town with Christianity." The court explained:
a municipality cannot— in our judgment— ensure that its prayer practice complies with the Establishment Clause simply by stating, expressly, that it does not mean to affiliate itself with any particular faith. Nor can a municipality insulate itself from liability by adopting a lottery to select prayer-givers or by actively pursuing prayer-givers of minority faiths whose members reside within the town. Similarly, there is no substantive mixture of prayer language that will, on its own, necessarily avert the appearance of affiliation. Ultimately, municipalities must consider their prayer practices in context and as a whole.... 
We do not hold that the town may not open its public meetings with a prayer or invocation.... Nor do we hold that any prayers offered in this context must be blandly “nonsectarian.”... Occasional prayers recognizing the divinities or beliefs of a particular creed, in a context that makes clear that the town is not endorsing or affiliating itself with that creed or, more broadly, with religion or non-religion, are not offensive to the Constitution.... [I]t seems to us that a practice ... that is inclusive of multiple beliefs and makes clear, in public word and gesture, that the prayers offered are presented by a randomly chosen group of volunteers, who do not express an official town religion, and do not purport to speak on behalf of all the town’s residents or to compel their assent to a particular belief—is fully compatible with the First Amendment.
... [However, a] legislative prayer practice that, however well-intentioned, conveys to a reasonable objective observer under the totality of the circumstances an official affiliation with a particular religion violates the clear command of the Establishment Clause.  Where the overwhelming predominance of prayers offered are associated, often in an explicitly sectarian way, with a particular creed, and where the town takes no steps to avoid the identification, but rather conveys the impression that town officials themselves identify with the sectarian prayers and that residents in attendance are expected to participate in them, a reasonable objective observer would perceive such an affiliation.
New York Law Journal reports on the decision.

Professor Sues Over University's Reaction To His Criticism of Muslims

AP reported yesterday on a lawsuit filed on May 10 in an Indiana state court by an Orthodox Jewish professor, Maurice Eisenstein, who claims that other faculty and administrators at Purdue University Calumet conspired to ruin his reputation over comments he made in the classroom and on Facebook.  The comments were critical of Muslim reactions to killing of Christians in Nigeria and to insulting the prophet Muhammad.  Two other faculty filed complaints against Eisenstein. A university investigation cleared Eisenstein of charges that he had violated the school's policy against discrimination and harassment. But he was reprimanded for action considered retaliation against the two faculty members who had filed complaints against him.  In last week's lawsuit, Eisenstein claims that the university violated his free speech and free exercise of religion protected by the Indiana constitution, and his right of privacy by making the disciplinary action against him public. He also claims the university's procedures for handling harassment complaints are arbitrary.

Thursday, May 17, 2012

Israeli Council To Recommend Memorial Day Reading Omit "God"

Haaretz reports today that in Israel, the Public Council for Soldiers' Commemoration will recommend to Defense Minister Ehud Barak that in Memorial Day ceremonies at military cemeteries the service use a remembrance reading that does not mention God. For many years, ceremonies often used a reading written in the 1920's by Labor Zionist leader Berl Katznelson. Modeled on the traditional Yizkor prayer in remembrance of the dead, Katznelson's version began with the words "Yizkor Am Yisrael" ("May the nation of Israel remember").  After the Six Day War, IDF Chief Rabbi Shlomo Goren changed the verse to read:  "Yizkor Elohim" ("May God remember").  Last year a secular mother of a fallen soldier objected to the version mentioning God, and a public debate followed. (See prior posting.) In this year's ceremonies, the reading was omitted entirely because of the dispute. Many families have complained about that. Under the new recommendation, the original version will officially be part of future ceremonies.

11th Circuit: Christian School's Reason For Firing Pregnant Teacher Is Jury Question

In Hamilton v. Southland Christian School, Inc., (11th Cir., May 16, 2012), the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's dismissal of a lawsuit by a former teacher at a Christian school in St. Cloud, Florida, who was fired after she became pregnant. The school claimed that she was fired because she engaged in pre-marital sex, marrying only after she was pregnant. Plaintiff claims that the real reason the school fired her was because of her pregnancy, and the difficulty in replacing a teacher who takes maternity leave mid-year. Explaining the importance of the distinction, the court said: "Title VII does not protect any right to engage in premarital sex, but as amended by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978, Title VII does protect the right to get pregnant." The court held that the real reason plaintiff was fired is an issue that needs to be decided by a jury. In the course of its opinion, the court pointed out that the school might have urged dismissal by invoking the ministerial exception doctrine. However, since it did not raise the issue or make any argument in its brief about it, the court refused to decide whether the exception applies here. Wall Street Journal reports on the decision.

Bishops Submit Comments On Proposed Contraceptive Coverage Mandate

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops yesterday submitted its formal comments on the Department of Health and Human Services Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking relating to health insurance coverage of contraceptive services. The Advance Notice includes the Administration's proposal 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. In its 21-page letter of comment (full text), the Catholic bishops set out numerous objections. In an accompanying press release, USCCB outlined its 6 main points:
  • Contraceptive services are still included in the list of mandated preventive services. 
  • Religious employers fully exempted from the mandate are defined too narrowly.
  • Many with conscientious objections, such as religious and secular insurance companies, religious and secular for-profit employers, and  individual policy-holders, are ineligible for the exemption.
  • Even under the Administration's expanded accommodation of non-profit religious organizations, secular employers are still fully under the coverage mandate.
  • Non-exempt religious organizations will still be required to provide plans that serve as a conduit for contraceptives and sterilization procedures to their own employees, and their premiums will help pay for those items.
  • The proposals raise questions of whether employers must be independently exempt for their employees to participate in an exempt plan, whether religious objection to some, but not all, contraceptives should be accommodated and whether a past practice of mistakenly or unknowingly covering contraceptives should disqualify one from accommodation.

D.C. Police Department Allows Sikh Officers To Wear Turbans, Beards

The Washington Post reports that yesterday the D.C. police force became the first police department in the country that proactively, and not in response to a lawsuit, is allowing Sikh police officers to wear beards and religious items such as turbans. The policy change came just as a Sikh reserve officer is about to graduate from the police academy. Police Chief Cathy Lanier called the change a common sense decision.  Under the new policy, turbans must match the police uniform and beards must be neatly tied back. The policy also allows Sikh officers to wear or carry other religious articles, including wearing a kirpan under their clothing. SALDEF issued a press release praising the new policy and crediting 8 years of cultural awareness training of the police department with laying the groundwork for the change.

Pastor Sues For Defamation Over Critical Blog Posting

KTAU News reported last week on a defamation lawsuit filed by Beaverton, Oregon Grace Bible Church Pastor Charles O'Neal against a former congregant and her daughter over postings on the former congregant's blog. Three commenters on the blog were also named as defendants.  When Julie Anne Smith and her family left the church, she says that other church members were told to end all contact with her.  So Smith started a blog called Beaverton Grace Bible Church Survivors on which she criticized the church, calling it a spiritually abusive environment.  Excerpts from the complaint in the case contending that these postings were defamatory, are the subject of a more recent blog post by Smith. The lawsuit seeks $500,000 in damages.  Apparently Smith has filed an anti-SLAPP motion seeking to get the case dismissed. [Thanks to Bryan D. Wassom for the lead.]

Wednesday, May 16, 2012

Iranian Clerics Issue Fatwa Justifying Killing of Anti-Government Rapper

The Wall Street Journal reports today that two influential clerics in Iranian have issued  fatwas that in effect declare that rapper Shahin Najafi has committed blasphemy against Ali an-Naqi., the 10th saint of Shiite Islam. This means that killing Najafi is justified. The fatwas came because of Najafi's rap song, Naqi, released online on May 7 which calls on the saint to save Iran from its current rulers. According to the Journal report:
After Mr. Najafi released his song ... Iranian media and conservative bloggers said it was in violation of an earlier fatwa calling for the execution of anyone who blasphemes the 10th saint of Shiite Islam.... A subsequent fatwa by another grand ayatollah declared that a singer who had been insulting the saint was guilty of blasphemy—giving the green light for his followers to kill Mr. Najafi, though the fatwa didn't mention the rapper by name. Both rulings have been repeated in Iranian media.
An Iranian website, Shia-Online, has offered $100,000 for Najafi's killing and others have pledged further rewards. Fatwas are issued independently of the government, but those who carry them out are not punished under Iranian law.

NLRB Finds No Violation In Requiring Clocking Out For Prayer Breaks

The NLRB's Associate General Counsel has issued an Advice Memorandum dated April 12 (full text) concluding that the Hertz Co. did not violate the National Labor Relations Act when it required Somali Muslim employees at the Seattle-Tacoma (WA) airport to clock out and in for their prayer breaks. The memo concluded that "the employer did not unlawfully implement a midterm contract change ... because it had a sound arguable basis for its interpretation of the contract as permitting it to require that practice." The memo also concluded that Hertz did not violate the NLRA by suspending, and ultimately discharging, the employees who insisted that they would continue to refuse to clock out for prayer breaks. (See prior related posting.) [Thanks to CCH Employment Law Daily via Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]