Orthodox Christian Activists Physically Attack Russian Erotic Art Museum

According to Interfax today, in Russia, Orthodox Christian activists have physically attacked Moscow's Erotic Art Museum on the Arbat.  A statement by museum director Alexander Donskoy said in part:

Today the Orthodox militants punish us for our support for Pussy Riot, send us death threats and rip clothes off ordinary passers-by, and tomorrow they will start destroying churches of other religious denominations and slay atheists. We ask the investigative authorities and personally our Constitution guarantor Vladimir Putin to stop this movement of Orthodox militants that is loathed in a secular state. We also hope that Patriarch Kirill will assess the actions of the people posing as Orthodox believers as they damage the perception of church as a bright spiritual institution.

Military Reports On Details of Qur'an Mishandling In Afghanistan

According to American Forces Press Service, on Monday the U.S. Central Command released the results of an investigation into a February incident involving the mishandling of some 1200 religious texts (including Qur'ans) that were removed from a detention facility in Parwan, Afghanistan and taken to Bagram Air Field to a fire pit used to burn garbage. The removal was prompted by a belief that extremist were using the books to exchange messages  The military concluded that no malicious intent was involved.  AP details the main findings of the new report:

[T]he burning disaster resulted from miscommunications, ignorance about the handling of Korans and the failure to provide clear guidance. Specifically, the report found that the service members relied too heavily on one linguist's conclusion that the Korans, which also had militant messages in them, were rewritten versions that were extremist and would not be considered real Korans. ... [A]lso ... service members mistakenly interpreted a commander's order to get rid of the books as permission to take them to the burn pit.... [O]nly one of the service members assigned to transport the books to the burn pit knew they were carrying religious books.

Six soldiers and three marines involved received administrative punishments. Disciplinary charges against one Navy sailor were dismissed. God and Country blog has further details.

Diverse Group of Clergy Will Lead Invocations and Benedictions At Republican Convention

The Republican National Convention got under way this afternoon.  Among other issues posed by the storm-related rescheduling was the rescheduling of clergy to deliver the opening invocation and closing benediction each of the 3 days. Here, as also reported by JTA, is the line-up of clergy:

• Tuesday invocation-- Rabbi Meir Soloveichik (Director of the Straus Center for Torah and Western Thought at Yeshiva University)
• Tuesday benediction-- Sammy Rodriguez (President of The National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference)
• Wednesday invocation-- Ishwar Singh (head of the Sikh Society of Central Florida)
• Wednesday benediction-- Archbishop Demetrios (Primate of the Greek Orthodox Church in America)
• Thursday invocation-- Ken and Priscilla Hutchins (President of the Boston Mormon temple and his wife)
• Thursday benediction-- Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan (President of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops)

Pakistan's Former Religious Affairs Head Released On Bail In Hajj Corruption Case

In Pakistan, according to yesterday's Express Tribune, former federal minister for religious affairs Hamid Saeed Kazmi, one of 3 officials criminally charged with corruption over the handling of housing in Saudi Arabia for Pakistani Hajj pilgrims in 2010, has been released from jail on bond. Kazmi had been in the Adiala Jail for 17 months awaiting trial. He was ordered by the court to post 2 surety bonds of RS100,000 ($1050 US) each. (See prior related posting.)

Military Appeals Court Says Ft. Hood Shooter's Appeal As To Beard Is Premature

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) yesterday lifted its previously imposed stay on the court martial proceedings of Fort Hood mass shooter Maj. Nidal Hasan.  The stay was imposed while the appeals court considered whether or not the presiding judge in the military trial can order Hasan, who has grown a beard for religious reasons, to be forcibly shaved. (See prior posting.) Now, as reported by Austin Legal, the CAAF decided that Hasan's appeal is premature because the trial judge has not yet formally ordered him to be shaved-- though Col. Gregory Gross who is conducting the court martial proceedings has repeated said that he will issue such an order. The CAAF's decision provides that, if Gross does issue the order, he is to spell out whether the Religious Freedom Restoration Act applies and explain why forcible shaving is the least restrictive means to further a compelling governmental interest. Gross' order could then be appealed to the Army Court of Criminal Appeals, the intermediate appellate court in the military system.

Contraceptive Mandate Challenge Dismissed For Lack of Standing and Ripeness

In Wheaton College v. Sebelius, (D DC, Aug. 24,2012), the D.C. federal district court dismissed for lack of standing and ripeness a challenge by Wheaton College to the mandate issued under the Affordable Care Act requiring group health insurance policies to cover contraceptive services for women.  Wheaton College claimed that offering Plan B and Ella emergency contraception violates its religious beliefs. (See prior posting.)  Because the Department of Health and Human Services has announced a one-year enforcement safe harbor for non-profit groups whose religious beliefs are violated by the mandate, the court concluded that Wheaton does not face imminent enforcement action.

Church Challenges Ordinance Limiting Movable Message Displays

The Church of the Good Shepherd- United Methodist, in Vienna, Virginia, earlier this month filed a lawsuit against the Fairfax (VA) Board of County Supervisors challenging the application of the county's sign ordinance to the church's new $37,000 sign. According to yesterday's Washington Examiner, the county objected to the sign that displays movable messages because the county ordinance only allows movable copy signs to change messages two times in 24 hours.  The church's sign displayed 3 different messages. The church's lawsuit claims the ordinance violates its free speech and free exercise rights as well as the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act.

Court Rejects Religious Accommodation Complaint By Orthodox Jewish Federal Employee

In Marmulszteyn v, Napolitano, (ED NY, Aug. 22, 2912), a New York federal district court dismissed a Title VII religious accommodation lawsuit brought by an Jewish man who claimed that U.S. Customs and Border Protection failed to reasonably accommodate his need not to work on Saturdays while he was employed as a Customs and BorderProtection Officer.  The court found that no adverse employment action had been taken because of plaintiff's refusal to work a Saturday shift.  Instead it allowed him to swap shifts with others.  Further, he was offered a reasonable accommodation-- a weekend overnight shift in place of his Saturday morning assignment. His claim that he was the victim of religious discrimination because he did not receive a permanent religious exemption of the sort some other employees enjoyed was rejected. [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Bridgett Dunlap, Protecting the Space to Be Unveiled: Why France's Full Veil Ban Does Not Violate the European Convention on Human Rights, (Fordham International Law Journal, Vol. 35, No. 4, 2012).
• Samuel J. Levine, A Look at the Establishment Clause Through the Prism of Religious Perspectives: Religious Majorities, Religious Minorities, and Nonbelievers, (Chicago-Kent Law Review, Vol. 87, p. 775, 2012).
• Thomas M. Haney, The Role of Religion in a Catholic Law School: A Century of Experience at Loyola University Chicago, (August 16, 2012).
• Douglas Laycock and Luke W. Goodrich, RLUIPA: Necessary, Modest, and Under-Enforced, (Fordham Urban Law Journal, Vol. 39, p. 1021, 2012).
• Linda Greenhouse and Reva B. Siegel, Before Roe v. Wade: Voices that Shaped the Abortion Debate before the Supreme Court's Ruling, (2012).
• Luke Berg, Scrutinizing Relationships: Applying the Tiered Framework to Marriage, (February 19, 2012).

From SmartCILP:

• Kent Greenawalt, Religion and Public Reasons: Making Laws and Evaluating Candidates,  27 Journal of Law & Politics 387-414 (2012).
• Overcoming Family Law's Parochialism: The Place of Comparative Family Law, 83 University of Colorado Law Review 963-1205 (2012).

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Williams v. Cate, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116472 (ED CA, Aug. 17, 2012), a California federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing claims by an inmate of the House of Yahweh faith that he was denied a kosher diet, not given funding to purchase religious materials, and that defendants spread false propaganda and denied worship services for House of Yahweh.

In Bell v. Parsons, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117800 (WD NC, Aug. 21, 2012), a North Carolina federal district court ordered a Muslim prisoner who complained that his religious items were confiscated from his cell in a prison shake down during Ramadan to show he had exhausted his administrative remedies, or else face dismissal of his lawsuit.

In Bryant v. Johnson, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118173 (WD VA, Aug. 21, 2012), a Virginia federal district court dismissed objections by a Muslim inmate that prison officials would not extend the Ramadan feeding policy to a fast outside of Ramadan that plaintiff alleged he undertook for religious reasons. Plaintiff skipped 17 consecutive meals and then resisted efforts by prison officials to weigh him. The court was not convinced that the fast was religiously motivated. Prison officials saw it as a hunger strike.

In Sousa v. Wegman, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118421 (ED CA, Aug. 20, 2012), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed with leave to amend

Malik v. City of New York, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118358 (SD NY, Aug. 15, 2012), a New York federal magistrate judge recommended allowing an inmate to proceed with claims that correctional officers ripped up and destroyed his Qur'an.

In Nance v. Miser, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119420 (D AZ, Aug. 23, 2012), an Arizona federal district court  permitted a Muslim inmate to proceed with his complaint that he was denied a Halal diet and a shaving waiver.

In Strange v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119599 (WD KY, Aug. 23, 2012), a Kentucky federal district court allowed a pre-trial detainee who says he is Jewish to proceed with his claim that he is not permitted to have a prayer rug, a "yamike", read the Torah, attend worship, or practice his religion, and that there are no rabbis at the jail.

In Alverson v. Allen, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119149 (MD AL, Aug. 23, 2012), an Alabama federal magistrate judge dismissed claims by an inmate that he was not allowed to attend church while housed in the hot (restricted privileges) dorm.

In Tariq v. Chatman, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118546 (MD GA, Aug. 22, 2012), a Georgia federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118544, July 18, 2012) and permitted a Muslim inmate to proceed with his claim that his Noble Qu'ran was confiscated by prison officials who said it is "radical," "teaches hate," and has "the wrong kind of stuff in it." In a separate opinion (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118538, Aug. 22, 2012) the court dismissed certain of the defendants.

In Dabbs v. Vaughn, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119137 (SD IL, Aug. 22, 2012), an Illinois federal district court, while dismissing certain claims and defendants, allowed a former inmate to proceed against others on his 1st Amendment free exercise claim that the prison chaplain took all but 5 Jewish inmates off the kosher diet list and off the monthly call passes for religious visits for buying non-kosher food from the commissary. The chaplain allegedly required Jewish prisoners to document their need for a kosher diet by submitting a two paragraph essay.

In Dyer v. Hardwick, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119693 (ED MI, Aug. 23, 2012), a Michigan federal district court adopted in relevant part a magistrate's recommendations (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119704, Aug. 3, 2012) that had concluded that mere offensive remarks about a Jewish inmate's religion made by the deputy warden did not amount to a constitutional violation, nor did the deputy warden's suggestion that plaintiff withdraw her request for kosher meals so she could be transferred to another facility that did not offer them.

D.C. Circuit Upholds Obama Administration Embryonic Stem Cell Research Guidelines

In Sherley v. Sebelius, (DC Cir., Aug. 24, 2012), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld the Obama administration's embryonic stem cell research Guidelines against a claim that they violate limitations on such research imposed by Congress under the Dickey-Wicker Amendment.  This was the third time the case was before the Circuit Court.  Invoking the law of the case, Chief Judge Sentelle held that, as the court had previously decided, "Dickey-Wicker  permits federal funding of research projects that utilize already-derived ESCs—which are not themselves embryos—because no 'human embryo or embryos are destroyed' in such projects."  He also rejected plaintiffs' argument that research on embryonic stem cells violate the ban on subjecting embryos to risk because such research incentivizes the destruction  of  more  embryos  to  create  more cell  lines. Finally he rejected claims that NIH violated the Administrative Procedure Act in issuing the Guidelines without responding to various comments that had been submitted. Judge Henderson and Judge Brown each filed separate opinions concurring in the result, but disagreeing about the extent of deference that should have been given to the NIH's interpretation of the Dickey-Wicker Amendment. (See prior related posting.) AP reports on the decision.

Sri Lankan Court Gives French Tourists Suspended Sentence For Offensive Photo With Buddha

BBC News reported on Tuesday that in Sri Lanka, three French tourists were given suspended jail sentences after they were photographed posing with Buddha statues and pretending to kiss one of the statues. They were apparently charged under Sec. 290A of the country’s Penal Code which provides:

Whoever does any act, in or upon, or in the vicinity of, any place of worship or any object which is held sacred with intent to or in veneration by any class of persons, with the intention wounding the religious feelings of any class of persons or with the knowledge that any class of persons is likely to consider such act as an insult to their religion, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.

Police in the town of Galle arrested the tourists after a photo lab where they had taken the pictures to be printed alerted authorities. 

Group Claims Missouri Baptist Convention Endorsed Political Candidates In Violation of Tax Code

Americans United on Thursday filed a complaint with the Internal Revenue Service alleging that the Missouri Baptist Convention endorsed candidates in the Republican primary in violation of the Internal Revenue Code's ban on non-profit organizations intervening in political campaigns. (Press release.)  In its letter (full text) to the IRS, Americans United said:

In a May 2012 edition of The Pathway, the official publication of the Missouri Baptist Convention, MBC Director of Public Policy Don Hinkle endorsed two candidates for public office in the August Republican primary – U.S. Senate candidate Todd Akin and state attorney general candidate Ed Martin. 

The letter also pointed to a July 2012 article in the same publication listing over 100 Missouri Baptist clergy who endorsed Aikin.

FFRF Protests Extensive Religious Involvement Of School's Football Program

The Freedom From Religion Foundation (press release) sent a letter this week (full text) to the superintendent of the Walker County, Georgia schools complaining about unusually extensive religious entanglement of local churches with the Ridgeland High School football program. It says that football coach Mark Mariakis takes the team to a different local church for dinner before each game. The minister or youth pastor blesses the food before dinner and sermonizes players about Christianity. The letter claims that at one point Mariakis took players to a Mormon church for dinner and afterward made fun of the Mormon religion within hearing distance of Mormon football players. FFRF says that the coach also prays with the team after each game, uses Bible verses on team gear, participates in the Fellowship of Christian Athletes meetings, and pressures players to attend a Christian football camp over the summer.

Gay Former Employee of Library of Congress Sues For Discrimination

A former employee of the Library of Congress' inspector general's office has filed a Title VII lawsuit in federal district court in Washington, D.C. alleging that his supervisor harassed him with religious-based condemnation of homosexuality.  According to Wednesday's Washington Post, Peter TerVeer alleges that his supervisor John Mech continually quoted Biblical passages and lectured him condemning homosexuality after Mech found out that TerVeer is gay. Mech allegedly began creating a paper trail to downgrade TerVeer's performance ratings. When TerVeer complained to the Library of Congress' EEO office the situation deteriorated, and he took an extended medical leave for stress that led to his firing.  TerVeer filed suit after the EEO office ruled he had not been discriminated against.

Victim Rights Groups Sue Over MO House of Worship Protection Act

A federal lawsuit was filed Wednesday by two groups that support victims of clergy sexual abuse challenging the constitutionality of Missouri's new House of Worship Protection Act. The law prohibits intentionally disrupting a church, synagogue or mosque. The complaint (full text) in Survivors Network of Those Abused By Priests, Inc. v. Joyce, (ED MO, filed 8/22/2012), claims that the  law which goes into effect on Aug. 28 infringes plaintiffs' free speech rights and that the law is unconstitutionally vague. The plaintiffs, SNAP and Voice of the Faithful, regularly picket, distribute leaflets or stand with signs outside Catholic churches to support victims of clergy abuse and encourage reform in the Catholic Church. ACLU of Eastern Missouri announced the filing of the lawsuit.

B&B Settles Discrimination Suit By Agreeing To No Longer Host Wedding Receptions

The ACLU yesterday announced that it had reached a settlement with a Vermont bed and breakfast in Baker and Linsley v. Wildflower Inn.  The suit charged the B&B with discrimination after it refused to host a same-sex wedding reception for two women because of the owners' religious beliefs. In the settlement, Wildflower Inn agreed that the Vermont Fair Housing and Public Accommodation Act bars unequal treatment of same-sex couples, including a failure to respond to inquiries or discouraging same-sex couples from using the facilities. The resort agreed to pay a $10,000 civil penalty to the Vermont Human Rights Commission-- which had intervened as a co-plaintiff-- and $20,000 to a charitable trust to be disbursed by the couple, Kate and Ming Linsley.  However, instead of agreeing to host same-sex wedding receptions, the Inn agreed that it will no longer host wedding receptions of any kind.

More Suits By Businesses and Schools Challenging Affordable Care Act Mandate

Another lawsuit has been filed by Catholic private business owners objecting to the Affordable Care Act mandate that requires employee health insurance policies to cover contraceptive services. The complaint (full text) in Yep v. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, (ND IL, filed 8/22/2012) alleges that the federal Mandate, as well as a similar state law mandate, violate plaintiffs' rights under the 1st Amendment and RFRA and under parallel state statutory and constitutional provisions. Plaintiffs are Triune Health Group, Inc. and its co-owners Christpher and Mary Yep. The complaint alleges in part that the plaintiffs

believe that the procreative capacity of human beings represents a precious gift from God by which individuals are allowed to participate in God’s plan to share life and that, as a result, any acts of deliberate interference with that procreative capacity bound up with acts of unitive human love – including artificial contraception, abortion, and/or sterilization – are gravely wrong and sinful. They also believe that the use and promotion of reproductive technologies that involve the destruction of human embryos or which purport to divide and sunder the procreative core of human sexuality from its unitive elements are gravely wrong and sinful. That both the federal and state governments would coerce plaintiffs to flout such profound and fundamental beliefs seems totally at odds with repeated declarations of the Founding Fathers.

A press release from the Thomas More Society announced the filing of the lawsuit.

Meanwhile, two more Christian colleges filed suit in an Indiana federal district court challenging the federal mandate.  The complaint (full text) in Grace Schools v. Sebelius, (ND IN, filed 8/23/2012) asserts a variety of 1st Amendment claims, as well as 5th Amendment, RFRA and Administrative Procedure Act claims on behalf of Grace College and Seminary and Biola University.  Among the allegations:

The Mandate adopts a particular theological view of what is acceptable moral complicity in provision of abortifacient coverage and imposes it upon all religionists who must either conform their consciences or suffer penalty.

Alliance Defending Freedom issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

EEOC Sues For Failure To Accommodate Religious Belief As To Clothing Style

The EEOC announced Tuesday that it has filed a religious discrimination lawsuit in Texas federal district court against  Fries Restaurant Management, LLC, the operator of a Burger King in Grand Prairie, Texas.  Ashanti McShan, a high school senior and a member of the Pentecostal Church, was told during her job interview that she would be able to wear a skirt instead of the standard uniform pants, as required by her religious beliefs. However when she arrived at orientation for her position, she was told that wearing the skirt was unacceptable and was sent home and never called back to work.  The lawsuit seeks back pay, compensatory and punitive damages, and injunctive relief for the company's failure to accommodate McShan's religious beliefs.

Church Can Get RLUIPA Damages, But Not For Hypothetical Lost Contributions

In a suit challenging the refusal to rezone land for use by a church, after a remand from the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (see prior posting), the city of San Leandro, California sought summary judgment on whether the church is entitled to damages on its "substantial burden" claim under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act.  In International Church of the Foursquare Gospel v. City of San Leandro, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117347 (ND CA, Aug. 20, 2012), a California federal district, while finding that damages are recoverable for violations of RLUIPA's substantial burden provisions, dismissed as too speculative the church's claim for lost contributions from hypothetical new church members that would have attended if it had moved into a larger building. The court also rejected the argument that an award of damages would amount to unjust enrichment for the church, and that would amount to a preference for religion that would violate of the Establishment Clause.