Secular Coalition Seeking To Create State Offices

National Journal reported yesterday that the Secular Coalition for America has launched a drive to create state chapters of the organization in all 50 states. Up to now, SCA has focused on lobbying at the federal level.  The state chapters will be run by volunteers and will not have office space. They will focus on state and local legislation that threatens separation of church and state.

Lawsuits Seek Same-Sex Marriage Rights In Illinois

Two lawsuits were filed yesterday in federal district court in Illinois seeking to strike down provisions of Illinois law that bar the issuance of marriage licenses to same-sex couples and prevent legal recognition of same-sex marriages.  The suits allege that denial of same-sex couples the right to marry violates various provisions of the Illinois constitution.  As announced in an ACLU press release, one suit was filed by the ACLU on behalf of nine couples, and the other by Lambda Legal on behalf of 16 couples.  The suits are Lazaro v. Orr, (IL Cir. Ct., filed 5/30/ 2012) (full text of complaint) and Darby v. Orr,, (IL Cir. Ct., filed 5/30/2012) (full text of complaint). Illinois law provides for same-sex civil unions, but not same-sex marriages. (See prior posting.)

New York Transit Authority Settles Religious Accommodation Suit With Justice Department

The U.S. Department of Justice announced yesterday that it has reached a settlement agreement with the New York City Transit Authority in a Title VII religious discrimination case that the Department of Justice filed in 2004.  The suit alleges that after 9-11, NYCTA began enforcing its previously unenforced head wear policy in a discriminatory manner against Muslims and Sikhs.  The Transit Authority refused to accommodate religious beliefs that preclude attaching an NYCTA logo to a khimar or turban, moving non-complying employees out of public contact positions. Under yesterday's agreement, which still requires federal court approval, the Transit Authority must adopt new uniform head wear policies that allow employees in public contact positions to wear khimars, yarmulkes, turbans, kufis, skullcaps, tams and headscarves without attaching anything to them. It must also implement a new religious accommodation policy and train personnel in implementing it.  In addition, it must divide $184,500 in damages among current and former employees whose religious beliefs were not accommodated.

Judge Stops Murfreesboro Mosque Construction, Holding Inadequate Notice Given For Planning Commission Meeting

A Tennessee Chancery Court judge yesterday issued an opinion that stops, at least temporarily, the ongoing construction of a controversial mosque in Murfreesboro, Tennessee.  In 2011, the court dismissed all the challenges to the Rutherford County Regional Planning Commission's approval of building plans for the mosque, but allowed plaintiffs to move ahead with their claim that the county violated the Open Meetings Act when it publicized the Planning Commission meeting only in the Murfreesboro Post. (See prior posting.) Now in Fisher v. Rutherford County Regional Planning Commission, (TN Chancery, May 29, 2012), the court held that given the importance of the issue to be discussed at the the Planning Commission meeting, the county had given inadequate public notice of it. Reporting on the decision, The Tennessean says that the Commission can still reconsider the issue after proper notice, and again approve the mosque plans. After the state court decision, the Council on American-Islamic Relations called for the U.S. Justice Department to step in. In a press release, CAIR said: "the judge used phrases and reasoning which could be viewed as indicating that a higher degree of public notice is required for issues related to Tennessee Muslims.

UPDATE: CNN Wire reports that the leader of the Murfreesboro Islamic Center says that construction will continue until it receives a formal order to stop.  The judge in his May 29 opinion called for plaintiffs' counsel to prepare an order that the court will then issue.  A draft order was filed on May 30. Defendants will have 5 days to review it, after which the court may sign it.

Israeli Government To Begin Paying Salaries of Non-Orthodox Rabbis

In Israel, the Attorney General's office announced yesterday in an historic move that the government will begin to pay the salaries of some non-Orthodox rabbis, as it now does for Orthodox rabbis. Jerusalem Post reports the move comes in response to a recommendation earlier this month from the country's High Court of Justice. Regional Councils will now be able to pay Masorti and Reform rabbis for any communities who request them. Wages equal to that paid to Orthodox rabbis will be funneled through the Ministry of Sport and Culture, instead of through the Ministry of Religious Services that funds Orthodox rabbis. However, according to Haaretz, the arrangement applies only to regional councils and farming communities, and does not extend to large cities. Also "rabbis of non-Orthodox communities" will not have authority over issues of Jewish law.

First Suit Filed Under Hawaii's 2-Year Window For Child Sex Abuse Claims

In Honolulu last Thursday, the first lawsuit was filed under a Hawaii law that became effective in April (full text) giving a one-time 2-year window for filing of claims of sexual abuse against minors, even though the statute of limitations has otherwise run.  According to AP, the lawsuit was brought on behalf a man claiming sexual abuse by a priest at an all-boys Catholic school's overnight retreat in the 1980s when plaintiff was 13-years old. The suit claims that accused priest Gerald Funcheon was allowed unsupervised access to children at Damien Memorial School even though reports had been made to his order about inappropriate sexual conduct toward minors.

Indian Court Strikes Down Religious Groups' Backward Class Subquota

Last December, the government of India announced the creation of a 4.5% sub-quota for economically and socially disadvantaged non-Hindu minorities-- Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists and Zoroastrians-- within the existing 27% Other Backward Classes (OBC) set-asides for government jobs and education. (See prior posting.) Now, according to a report yesterday by the Economic Times, the Andhra Pradesh high court has struck down the sub-quota. It held that a sub-quota cannot be based on purely religious grounds. It said that "Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists and Zoroastrians (Parsis) do not form a homogeneous group." The sub-quota was widely seen as a political ploy to attract Muslim votes in legislative assembly elections that were upcoming at the time the sub-quota was announced. Indian Express reports that Minority Affairs and Law Minister Salman Khurshid says the court's decision will be appealed.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Florer v. Bales-Johnson, (9th Cir., May 15, 2012), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed an inmate's free exercise and RLUIPA complaints about his kosher diet, finding that he failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact that the meals he received substantially burdened his ability to exercise his religion. (See prior related posting.)

In Nzaddi v. Department of Corrections, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69510 (D MA, May 18, 2012), a Massachusetts federal district court permitted a Baha'i inmate to proceed against two named defendants on her claim that she was denied kosher meals that were required according to her religious beliefs.

In Bargo v. Kelley, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69649 (ED AR, May 18, 2012), an Arkansas federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69653, May 1, 2012) and denied a preliminary injunction in a case in which an inmate alleged that his free exercise, due process, and equal protection rights were violated when authorities refused to allow him to be interviewed by Indigo Films for a documentary.

In Benning v. Georgia, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71813 (MD GA, May 23, 2012), a Georgia federal district court enjoined prison officials from enforcing their grooming policy in a way that completely banned an inmate who professed Orthodox Judaism from growing earlocks. The court held that it is sufficient that the inmate's religious beliefs are sincere. It is irrelevant that he is not Jewish under the criteria set out by Jewish religious law.

Missouri Religion Amendment Moved To August Ballot

The St.Louis Post Dispatch reported last week that Missouri Governor Jay Nixon, a Democrat, has decided that a proposed state constitutional amendment (full text) that guarantees the right to pray and express religious views on public property and in schools will be voted on in the August 7 primary election rather than the November general elections.  The legislative resolution proposing the amendment provided that it should appear on the ballot either in November or in a special election called by the governor.  Apparently the governor's timing was motivated by the likelihood that the amendment will attract social conservatives (mostly Republicans) to the polls, and would thus benefit the Republicans in the general election of it were on the November ballot. Wall of Separation also reports on the governor's move. (See prior related posting.)

Islamists Blame Copts For First Round Election Results In Egypt

AINA reported yesterday that many Egyptians, deeply dissatisfied with the choice for President they have in the upcoming run-off election, are blaming the Christian Copts.  Islamists are blaming the Copts for the fact that Ahmad Shafik, Hosni Mubarak's last Prime Minister, came in high enough to be in the run-off with Muslim Brotherhood candidate Mohamed Morsy. These critics have accused the Copts of being "traitors" and "anti-revolutionary." However, according to AINA, this assessment has been challenged:

Dr Emad Gad, MP and deputy director of Al-Ahram Centre for Strategic Studies, said this campaign against the Copts is a prepared strategy by the Muslim Brotherhood to increase the chances of their candidate in the run-off election, by promoting a lie that votes of the Copts helped Shafik to advance. "This is not true at all. The largest block of votes for Shafik was in the four provinces of the Delta, namely Sharkia, Gharbia, Menoufiah and Dakahila, where the Copts make up only 5% of the total population."

Meanwhile, CNN reports that yesterday several thousand protesters in Tahrir Square urged Egyptian courts to disqualify Shafik. Other protesters broke into Shafik's campaign headquarters and set it on fire. Three of the losing candidates in the first round have filed appeals with the election commission charging fraud. (AP) According to Bloomberg News, many youth groups and secularists who led last year's revolution favor Hamdeen Sabahi, a socialist candidate who came in third in the first round of the election. These activists want Shafik disqualified under a law that took away the political rights of some Mubarak era officials. Others want Morsi to step aside to allow Sabahi to run against Shafik.

Cert. Filed In Suit Over Prisoner's Right To Received NOI Newspaper

The Baton Rouge (LA) Advocate reports that a petition for certiorari has been filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in Leonard v. Louisiana. In the case, the 5th Circuit in a brief per curiam opinion (full text) held that prison officials were not justified in banning a prisoner from receiving Nation of Islam's newspaper The Final Call. Prison officials had imposed the ban because the paper contained "The Muslim Program" written by Elijah Muhammad. The 5th Circuit held: "While we do not agree that "The Muslim Program" is free of racially inflammatory language, the record here does not justify this order under circumstances where an objectionable page could be deleted and where this page has been included in all prior issues of the newspaper and is and always has been available to appellee." (See prior related posting.)

Guidelines on Bullying and Free Expression Released, Create Controversy

As reported by Education Week, last week a coalition of 17 religious, educational and civil rights groups, led by the American Jewish Committee and the First Amendment Center, released new guidelines on bullying in schools. An 11-page pamphlet titled Harassment, Bullying and Free Expression-- Guidelines for Free and Safe Public Schools is "intended to help public schools balance the need for school safety with the need for free expression." The next day, the Anti-Defamation League sent a letter to the Secretary of Education strongly criticizing the new guidelines.  The letter (full text) says in part:

the Guidelines issued this week emphasize students’ First Amendment rights over the responsibility to create a safe learning environment for all students – especially vulnerable minority, disabled, and LGBT students.  While we agree that students’ free speech and religious expression rights are important, we strongly disagree with the Guidelines’ direct implication that such rights have been given short shrift in current federal and state law and policy and need greater protection. 

The American Muslim has extensive background on the Guidelines and the controversy they have generated. [Thanks to Michael Lieberman for the lead.]

Kansas Governor Signs Bill Promoted As Anti-Sharia Measure

AP reports that Kansas governor Sam Brownback on May 21 signed into law H Sub SB 79. The legislation prohibits Kansas courts or tribunals from applying foreign law if that law would not grant the parties affected the same fundamental rights as they would have under the U.S. and Kansas constitutions, including equal protection, due process, free exercise of religion, freedom of speech or press, and any right of privacy or marriage. Supporters of the bill have pressed it as a measure designed to prevent Sharia law from being used by Kansas courts, leading the Council on American Islamic Relations to suggest that the statute may be challenged. (See prior related posting.) The new legislation defines foreign law as:

any law, legal code or system of a jurisdiction outside of any state or territory of the United States, including, but not limited to, international organizations and tribunals and applied by that jurisdiction’s courts, administrative bodies or other formal or informal tribunals.

The legislation is based on a model act promoted by the American Public Policy Alliance.

Suit Challenges New Ten Commandments Monument

On Friday, a lawsuit was filed challenging a 5 foot tall stone Ten Commandments monument that was put up earlier this month by the county commission in the courtyard of the Bradford County, Florida Courthouse. The complaint (full text) in American Atheists, Inc. v. Bradford County, Florida, (MD FL, filed 5/25/2012), alleges that the monument, which was unveiled in conjunction with a religious prayer ceremony, violates the Establishment Clause. A press release from American Atheists announced the filing of the lawsuit. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

District Court Invalidates DOMA and Related Care Insurance Restrictions

In Dragovich v. U.S. Department of the Treasury, (ND CA, May 24, 2012), a California federal district court held unconstitutional Sec. 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act and federal provisions (26 USC Sec. 7702B(f)) that effectively bar states from permitting same-sex domestic partners or same-sex spouses from participating in state-maintained long-term care insurance policies. DOMA was defended by the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the United States House of Representatives (BLAG) since the administration refused to defend its constitutionality.  In striking down the provisions, the court said in part:

the legislative record contains evidence of anti-gay animus and the BLAG has failed to establish that § 3 of the DOMA is rationally related to a legitimate government interest.  Accordingly, Plaintiff same-sex spouses are entitled to summary judgment that § 3 of the DOMA is invalid under the Constitution’s equal protection principles to the extent that the law blocks their access to the CalPERS long-term care plan....

Because Congress’s restriction on state-maintained long-term care plans lacks any rational relationship to a legitimate government interest, but rather appears to be motivated by antigay animus, the exclusion of registered domestic partners of public employees from § 7702B(f)’s list of individuals eligible to enroll in state-maintained long-term care plans violates the Constitution’s equal protection guarantee.

Metro Weekly reports on the decision.

Document Leaks, Bank President's Ouster Create Crisis Atmosphere At Vatican

Two parallel developments in the Vatican were described yesterday by Reuters as a "widening scandal." Last Thursday the Supervisory Board of the Institute for the Works of Religion (the Vatican Bank) dismissed the president of the bank, Prof. Gotti Tedeschi. (Vatican press release.) Tedeschi says he was ousted because of his attempts to make the bank more transparent. The band has been attempting in recent years to meet international anti-money laundering standards. (See prior posting.) However Vatican officials say the ouster had nothing to do with that. Reuters says that instead it was the result of  "progressively erratic personal behavior" and his failure to defend the bank "in the face of inaccurate media reports".

Meanwhile, on Saturday the Pope's personal butler, Paolo Gabriele, was arrested (Vatican press release) in an ongoing investigation of theft of confidential papers that have been published. They allege cronyism and corruption among the Cardinals. (See prior posting.) AP reports that Gabriele has agreed to cooperate with investigators.

8th Circuit: Freethinkers Have Standing To Challenge 10 Commandments Monument

In Red River Freethinkers v. City of Fargo, (8th Cir., May 25, 2012), the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals held that a organization dedicated to promoting atheist and agnostic views has standing on behalf of its members to challenge a Ten Commandments monument that has stood for 50 years outdoors on city property in Fargo, North Dakota. City Council had originally decided to move the monument, but reversed its decision after an initiative petition to keep the monument on city property garnered over 5,200 signatures. In reaching its conclusion on standing, the court said:

The injuries to Freethinkers’s members are no doubt actual and imminent.  The City’s display of the Ten Commandments monument has continued now for fifty years, with no end in sight.  Those members have encountered the monument, causing them “to feel isolated and unwelcome in the city.” ... Furthermore, those injuries are personal to Freethinkers’s members.....

The City displays a Ten Commandments monument; it has enacted an ordinance prohibiting the removal of that monument; no other monument is so protected; and the City has a policy of not accepting other monuments in the mall where the Ten Commandments monument stands.... The claimed injury—direct and unwelcome contact with the monument—is “fairly traceable” to the alleged Establishment Clause violation....

The City’s assertion—that there is “no basis in law” for removal of the monument—is wrong.  If the City’s monument violates the Establishment Clause, then a court can order its removal....

By a 2-1 vote, the court remanded the case to the district court for further proceedings. Judge Shepherd, while agreeing that plaintiffs had standing, argued that the case should be dismissed on the merits:

The Commission’s initial decision to move the existing monument from its long-standing site can best be understood as an exercise in pragmatism—one intended to forestall a challenge to its decision not to accept Freethinkers’s offer to erect a “sister” monument.  In light of this background, no reasonable observer would conclude that the Commission’s adoption of the initiated ordinance also adopted and conferred upon the monument the religious views of the ordinance’s proponents.

AP reports on the decision.

Paper Criticizes Candidate Roy Moore's Involvement On Issue That May Come To State Supreme Court

An editorial in the Anniston, Alabama Star yesterday strongly criticized former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, who is again a candidate for that position in the fall election, for becoming involved on one side of an issue that the Alabama Supreme Court may eventually be called to rule upon. The city of Sylvania, Alabama placed a verse from the New Testament-- "One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism"-- on the town's four Welcome sign. In April, the Freedom From Religion Foundation objected (full text of letter) and convinced the town to remove the signs. (FFRF press release.) Earlier this month, however, the town council voted to place the Biblical quotation back on the signs, and the Foundation for Moral Law, headed by former Chief Justice Moore, promised to defend the town's position.  A press release from the Foundation quotes Moore as saying: "The Freedom From Religion Foundation has an agenda to remove any acknowledgement of God or religion from the public square and are trying to bully towns like Sylvania with threatening letters that grossly misrepresent the Constitution." Here is a portion of Anniston Star's editorial on the matter:

One can — and should — question the propriety of an Alabama chief justice GOP nominee heading a foundation dedicated to a constitutional position on which he might one day have to rule. More important, one can — and should — wonder why Moore is personally getting involved in the first place.

Here is a prime example of the sort of controversy on which a chief justice should avoid taking a public stand. If and when matters such as this come before his court, he can then rule on them and explain in legal terms the reasoning behind his decision.

We hoped this was what Roy Moore would do. He has disappointed us again.

Mary Ann Glendon Appointed To USCIRF

On Wednesday, Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell appointed Mary Ann Glendon to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, according to a press release from USCIRF. Glendon is Professor of Law at Harvard University, President of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, and former U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See. One vacancy, to be filled by President Obama, remains on the 9-member Commission. When USCIRF was reauthorized late last year, the authorizing legislation required 5 of its commissioners to resign. (See prior posting.)

California City Settles RLUIPA Suit With Buddhist Group

According to the Walnut Patch, the Walnut, California City Council voted Wednesday to approve a $900,000 settlement with the Chung Tai International Chan Buddhist Association in a RLUIPA lawsuit. In 2008, the city denied a conditional use permit to the Association, then known as the Chung Tai Zen Center.  The Buddhist group wanted to build a temple on land it owned.  The denial led the Zen Center to move to another facility in Pamona. The Justice Department filed a RLUIPA lawsuit, and the Buddhist Association then intervened as a plaintiff in order to attempt to recover damages. The Justice Department settled with the city last year, obtaining changes in the city's zoning policies. (See prior posting.) The settlement involves a public apology by the city as well as the monetary payment.