Florida Democratic County Official Resigns Over His Remarks About Christian Supporters of Israel

The Palm Beach Post reports that Palm Beach County, Florida, Democratic Party Chairman Mark Alan Siegel resigned Friday, two days after making controversial remarks about pro-Israel Christians.  Interviewed at the Democratic National Convention by Patriot Update's Scottie Hughes, Siegel-- who is Jewish-- said of Christians who support Israel:

They’re not our friends. They want Israel to pursue policies which are antithetical with its security and existence. The worst possible allies for the Jewish state are the fundamentalist Christians, who want Jews to die and convert so they can bring on the second coming of their Lord. It is a false friendship. They are seeking their own ends and not ours.

After initially saying that he would merely take a leave of absence, Siegel then resigned completely, saying: "My comments merely served as a distraction to the good work of Democrats in Palm Beach. Again, I express my deepest apologies to anyone I may have offended."

Presbyterian Congregation's Property Belongs To Parent Church

In Windwood Presbyterian Church, Inc. v. The Presbyterian Church (USA), (TX App., Aug. 30, 2012), a Texas appeals court held that under both the rule of deference to decisions of a parent hierarchical church and the application of neutral principles of law, the property of a Houston, Texas Presbyterian congregation belongs to the parent church. The court concluded:

by joining the PCUSA in 1983 and remaining a member of that hierarchical church, Windwood has assented to following PCUSA’s constitution, which includes a trust provision over Windwood’s property in PCUSA’s favor.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Christopher C. Lund, The Future of the Establishment Clause in Context: A Response to Ledewitz, (Chicago-Kent Law Review, Vol. 87, p. 767, 2012, symposium).
• Nicholas Walter, Religious Arbitration in the United States and Canada, (Santa Clara Law Review, Vol. 52, No. 2, 2012).
• Michael A. Helfand, Religion's Footnote Four: Church Autonomy as Arbitration, (Minnesota Law Review, Vol. 97, Forthcoming).
• Robert W. Nicholson, Managing the Divine Jurisdiction: Sacred Space and the Limits of Law on the Temple Mount (1917-1948), (August 31, 2012).
• Justin Pierce, Blasphemy: Religious or Secular Law?,  (September 5, 2012).
• Robert C. Blitt, Springtime for Freedom of Religion or Belief: Will Newly Democratic Arab States Guarantee International Human Rights Norms or Perpetuate Their Violation?, (September 8, 2012).
• Beverley Baines, Polygamy and Feminist Constitutionalism, (in B. Baines, D. Barak-Erez, and T. Kahana, eds., Feminist Constitutionalism: Global Perspectives, Cambridge University Press, 2012).

President Declares This Weekend As Days of Prayer and Remembrance For 9-11 Victims

Last Friday, as we near the 11th anniversary of the 9-11 attacks, President Barack Obama issued a Proclamation (full text) declaring September 7 through 9 as National Days of Prayer and Remembrance for the victims of 9-11.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Morris v. Morrison, (8th Cir., Aug. 31, 2012), the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed an Iowa district court's dismissal on qualified immunity grounds of a prisoner's lawsuit alleging damage to religious property during a prison cell search.

In Davilla v. National Inmate Appeals Coordinator, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124451 (SD GA, Aug. 31, 2012), a Georgia federal district court, disagreeing in part with a magistrate's recommendation, permitted an inmate to proceed with his 1st Amendment challenge to prison policies that bar him from receiving religious items (here Santeria beads and cowrie divination shells) through authorized vendors.  The court also allowed plaintiff to proceed with his claim for injunctive relief under RFRA, but held that damages are not recoverable as a remedy under RFRA. UPDATE: The magistrate's recommendation is at 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130391, June 15, 2012).

In Oliverez v. Albitre, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124553 (ED CA, Aug. 31, 2012), a California federal magistrate judge recommended that an inmate be permitted to proceed with his 1st Amendment claim against the chaplain's office Native American spiritual leader, but not against the warden, for denying him access to his previously-purchased spiritual oil for worship.

In Mendez v. Trevino, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124591 (ED CA, Aug. 30, 2012), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed, with leave to amend, a suit by a Native American "Yaqui" Indian whose religious practice involves both Native American and Christian elements. He was not allowed to attend Native American services because he was already attending Christian services and because of hearsay information of drug usage and beadwork sale.

In Jones v. Petty, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124850 (MD GA, Sept. 4, 2012), a Georgia federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124849, Aug. 2, 2012) and dismissed a Muslim inmate's complaint that he was prevented from practicing Ramadan, obtaining a prayer rug and religious books, obtaining his prayer towel, and obtaining a pork-free breakfast tray.

In Walters v. Santa Clara Department of Corrections Elmwood Facility Commander 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125281 (ND CA, Sept. 4, 2012), a California federal district court permitted a Muslim inmate to proceed with his 1st Amendment, RLUIPA and equal protection complaints alleging failure to provide him an adequate religious diet.

In Countryman v. Palmer, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125224 (D NV, Aug. 6, 2012), a Nevada federal magistrate judge recommended denial of a preliminary injunction in a suit by an Episcopalian inmate who objected to the prison's cancellation of a planned 3-day event by the Kairos Prison Ministries.

In Malipurathu v. Jones, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124988 (WD OK, Sept. 4, 2012), an Oklahoma federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124983, June 14, 2012) and rejected complaints of a Sikh inmate who had been dismissed from a drug treatment program in which he had been placed in lieu of incarceration. Plaintiff objected that the program included Christian-based prayers.

In Howard v. Wiglesworth, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125617 (SD MI, Sept. 5, 2012), a Mississippi federal magistrate judge dismissed a lawsuit by a Rastafarian inmate complaining that no Rastafarian religious services were offered (no one was available to lead them), and claiming that he was not provided a religious diet or permitted to wear his dreadlocks.

In Jahad Ali #56036 v. Clements, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125612 (D CO, Sept. 4, 2012), a Colorado federal magistrate judge ruled that an inmate's complaint that prison authorities refused to honor a 1992 agreement to recognize his religious and legal name needed to be amended within 30 days to set forth appropriate allegations or it will be dismissed.

In Manson v. Sexton, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125750 (ND AL, Sept. 5, 2012), an Alabama federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125733, Aug. 8. 2012) and dismissed without prejudice an inmate generalized claim that he was provided religious materials that were not "necessarily of [his] belief."

Pakistani Girl Charged With Blasphemy Released On Bail

In Pakistan today, Rimsha Masih, a Christian girl being held on controversial blasphemy charges, was released on 1 million rupees ($10,500 US) bail. The New York Times reports that Masih was driven away in secrecy from a Rawalpindi prison to a waiting helicopter. The court found that she is 14 years old, with a mental capacity lower than that.  Masih, who works as a sweeper, was charged with burning pages from a holy book, while a Muslim cleric was charged with planting pages from the Qur’an to make her actions appear worse. (See prior posting.) The case has been widely publicized internationally as an example of abuses in the use of Pakistan’s blasphemy laws.

Suit Challenging Exclusion From Courtroom Because of Religious Headdress Can Proceed Against City

In Daniels v. City of North Charleston, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126314 (D SC, Sept. 6, 2012), a South Carolina federal district court adopted a magistrate’s recommendations (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126767, Aug. 9, 2012) and permitted plaintiff (an adherent of the East African Hebrew religion) to move ahead with several of his claims growing out of the refusal of Municipal Court constables to allow him to enter the court room wearing religious headdress . The court allowed plaintiff to proceed on his charges that the city violated his free exercise rights under the federal constitution as well as under the South Carolina Religious Freedom Act. It also allowed him to proceed on certain common law claims. However religious discrimination and other constitutional claims against the constables in their individual capacities were dismissed on the basis of quasi-judicial immunity.

Feds Concur In Eliminating Offensive Name Of New Hampshire Pond

The Nashua (NH) Telegraph reports today that the U.S. Board of Geographic Names has officially approved the name change of a small pond in Mont Vernon, Hew Hapmshire so that it is no longer officially known as "Jew Pond." Instead its official name is now "Carleton Pond", though the USGS still lists" Jew Pond," as well as "Spring Pond," as a "variant name." The pond was created for a local hotel a century ago by damming a small brook. Originally called Spring Pond, it began to be called Jew Pond in the 1930's when the hotel was owned for a few years by Jewish businessmen from Boston. The name Jew Pond, which was seen as offensive by many, was changed by the town after the town's health officer, Rich Masters, raised the issue last year.

Missouri Bishop Convicted Of Failing To Report Suspicion of Child Abuse

Yesterday in Kansas City, Missouri, a state court judge after a brief non-jury trial convicted Catholic Bishop Robert W. Finn on one misdemeanor count of failing to report suspicion of child abuse (MRS 210.115). According to the Kansas City Star, this makes Finn the highest ranking U.S. Catholic cleric convicted in the Church's sex abuse scandals.  The charges grew out of the Church's discovery in December 2010 of hundreds of lewd photos of young girls on the laptop computer of of priest Shawn Ratigan. Police were not notified until May 2011. Finn was convicted on a charge covering the period from Feb. through May 2011, while he was acquitted on a second charge covering an earlier period of time. Finn was sentenced to two years' probation. If he complies with all the conditions, his criminal conviction could then be expunged.  Those conditions include strengthening training for clergy and administrators on child abuse reporting and recognizing child pornography; creating a $10,000 victim counseling fund; drawing up an approved list of treatment providers; and maintaining an ombudsman. Originally Finn's case had been set for a jury trial, but prosecutors and defense attorney instead yesterday submitted 69 paragraphs of stipulated facts in a bench trial. In exchange for his cooperation in the case, authorities agreed not to prosecute second-ranking diocese official, Monsignor Robert Murphy, who ultimately reported suspicions to the police.

Fact Issues Remain In Nursing Aide's Firing After Refusing To Pray Rosary With Resident

Norbach v. Woodland Village Nursing Home Center, Inc., (SD MI, Sept. 4, 2012), is a Title VII religious accommodation lawsuit filed by a woman who was employed as an activity aide at a nursing home.  She was fired for insubordination after she refused to pray the rosary with a Catholic resident suffering from Alzheimer's disease. A Mississippi federal district court refused defendant's motion for summary judgment finding that a number of material questions of fact remain to be determined.  These include whether there were also other reasons for plaintiff's termination, whether praying the rosary conflicts with her religious beliefs and whether the nursing home could make a reasonable accommodation of her beliefs without experiencing an undue hardship. [Thanks to CCH Employment Law Daily via Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

9th Circuit Hears Oral Arguments In Religious Workers' Visa Case

Last week (Aug. 27), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in Ruiz-Diaz v. United States. In the case, a Washington federal district court rejected a challenge to immigration rules that treat religious workers applying to adjust their immigration status to become permanent residents differently from those in various other employment-based preference categories. (See prior posting.) An audio recording of the full arguments is available online, and Courthouse News has a summary of the oral arguments. Appellants argued  in part that delays in the adjustment of status may lead to a religious worker having to leave the country and a church being deprived of the right to practice its religion because it cannot find a replacement.

South Dakota High Court Dismisses Claims Based On Sex Abuse At Indian Reservation School

As reported by the Sioux City Journal, the South Dakota Supreme Court on Wednesday, in two opinions, dismissed several claims that had been filed by a number of former students of St. Paul's School on the Yankton Indian Reservation.  Plaintiffs claimed they had been sexually abused over 35 years ago while attending the boarding school that was operated by various Catholic religious orders and organizations.  In Bernie v. Blue Cloud Abbey, (SD Sup. Ct., Sept. 5, 2012), the court held that the extended statute of limitations for childhood sexual abuse in effect when the suit was filed does not extend the time for filing suit against the religious orders or the Diocese of Sioux Falls, as opposed to the claims against the perpetrators themselves. The extended limitation period only applies to suits alleging intentional conduct involving an act that would have constituted a felony. It does not apply to claims against "non-perpetrating defendants who are sued for negligence or on other theories of liability not involving intentional, criminal conduct."

In Bernie v. Catholic Diocese of Sioux Falls, (SD Sup. Ct., Sept. 5, 2012), the South Dakota Supreme Court rejected a respondeat superior claim against the Diocese of Sioux Falls because the alleged acts "were solely in the perpetrators’ own interests and were not in furtherance of the pursuit of any Diocesan business."  It also rejected negligence and breach of fiduciary duty claims against the Diocese because plaintiffs failed to show an agency relationship between the Diocese and the religious orders operating the school. Nor did the Diocese's relationship with the students create a fiduciary duty of protection.

Military Judge Orders Hasan To Shave Beard, Rejecting RFRA Claim

Yesterday at Fort Hood, Texas, a military judge in the court martial of accused mass killer Maj. Nidal Hasan has ordered Hasan to shave his beard or be forcibly shaved. The New York Times and a press release from Ft. Hood provide details on the decision. Hasan claims he has grown the beard for religious reasons.  The judge, Col. Gregory Gross, ruled that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act applies to court martial proceedings, but that the government has a compelling interest in requiring Hasan to shave because his wearing the beard would make it more difficult for witnesses to identify him.  The prosecution also introduced evidence that Hasan grew the beard in part to identify himself with the radical Islamic Mujahedeen. Col. Gross ruled that his order will not be carried out until Hasan has a chance to appeal the ruling.

Minnesota Board Exempts Catholic Organization Employee's Pro-Gay Marriage Contribution From Disclosure

Minnesota Statutes 10A.20 requires every political committee to file disclosure reports identifying anyone who has contributed over $100 to a candidate or to a campaign for a ballot issue, but allows an exemption where an individual "demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that disclosure would expose the ... contributor to economic reprisals, loss of employment, or threat of physical coercion."  In an interesting decision last month in In re Application of John Doe, (MN Campg. Fin. & Pub. Discl. Bd., Aug. 7, 2012), the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board granted an exemption to an employee of a Catholic organization who had contributed $600 to an organization that opposes the Marriage Amendment that will appear on the November ballot. That proposed amendment provides that "only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Minnesota." The contributor argued that "because his job requires him to represent the Catholic organization’s policies to others from time to time, if his opposition to the marriage amendment was known, it would cause immense strain in his working relationships." The Board concluded that "Mr. Doe has established by clear and convincing evidence that the itemized report of his contribution to Minnesotans United for All families would expose him to the loss of his employment." Dale Carpenter at Volokh Conspiracy has more on the decision.

European Court Interprets When EU Country Must Grant Asylum For Religious Persecution

In Bundesrepublik Deutschland v Y and Z, (EU Ct. Justice, Sept. 5, 2012), the Court of Justice of the European Union interpreted the EU's directive on the status of refugees in the case of two Pakistani members of the Ahmadiyya community who are seeking asylum in Germany.  As summarized by the Court's press release::

The Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Federal Administrative Court,  Germany), before which the disputes have been brought, asks the Court of Justice to specify what restrictions on the practice of a religion may be considered as persecution justifying the grant of refugee status.

In today’s judgment, the Court finds, first, that only certain forms of severe interference with the right to freedom of religion, and not any interference with that right, may constitute an act of persecution requiring the competent authorities to grant refugee status....

... [A]cts which may constitute a severe violation include serious acts which interfere with a person’s freedom not only to practice his faith in private circles but also to live that faith publicly.... [A] violation of the right to freedom of religion may constitute persecution where, because of the exercise of that liberty in his country of origin, there is a genuine risk that the asylum applicant will ... be prosecuted or subject to inhumane or degrading punishment.... [W]here the participation in formal worship... may give rise to such a risk, the violation of the right to freedom of religion may be sufficiently serious.

...[T]he protection afforded on the basis of persecution on religious grounds extends both to forms of personal or communal conduct which the person concerned considers to be necessary to him ... and to those prescribed by religious doctrine....

Finally ... where it is established that, upon his return to  his country of origin, the person concerned will engage in a religious practice which will expose him to a real risk of persecution, he should be granted refugee status.... [I]n assessing an application for refugee status on an individual basis, the national authorities cannot reasonably expect the applicant to abstain from the manifestation or practice of certain religious acts.

Deutsche Welle reports on the decision.

Retaliation Claim Survives In Employee's Religious Discrimination Suit

In Chukwueze v. NYCERS (New York City Employees' Retirement System), (SD NY, Aug. 30, 2012), a New York federal district court allowed an evangelical Christian of West Indian descent, a former employee of NYCERS, to proceed with his claim that he was fired in retaliation for his complaints about religious discrimination by his supervisor, Michelle Gaddy. However the court dismissed other of his claims, including a hostile work environment claim.  At issue was Omar Chukwueze's ongoing disputes with Gaddy over his requests to use leave to take off for various religious holidays, and claims that Gaddy continually berated him in the presence of his entire unit for his requests. [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

Official Says NYPD No Longer Surveilling New Jersey Muslim Groups

Yesterday, New Jersey state attorney general Jeffrey Chiesa told a group of Muslim leaders that the New York City Police Department's Demographics Unit that conducted surveillance of Muslim businesses, religious leaders and student groups is no longer operating in New Jersey. (See prior related posting.) According to an AP report carried by the Huffington Post, Chiesa however stood by his previously announced conclusion that the NYPD had not violated any New Jersey laws when it secretly spied on Muslim neighborhoods and organizations, infiltrated Muslim student groups and videotaped mosque-goers in New Jersey. Chiesa's remarks came at the first meeting of an outreach committee that has been formed to repair relations between New Jersey law enforcement officials and the Muslim community. An NYPD spokesman though said that the NYPD is "continuing and will continue to follow leads wherever they take us, including out-of-state."

Berlin Will Not Prosecute Religious Circumcision If Specified Conditions Are Met

Jurist reports that in Germany, state of Berlin Justice minister Thomas Heilmann announced in a press release yesterday (full text in German) that the state will not prosecute anyone performing a circumcision on a young boy so long as (1) the parents consent in writing after being informed of the risks, (2) the parents have a religious motivation for the procedure, and (3) the procedure is performed in accordance with acknowledged medical standards. The statement came in response to an inquiry by a Jewish hospital in Berlin after a court in Cologne ruled in June that parents do not have the right to authorize religious circumcision for their minor sons. (See prior posting.)

Democrats Amend Platform To Restore Language Specifically Mentioning God

As reported by ABC News, the Democratic National Convention at the beginning of its session today voted to amend its previously adopted Platform to restore the following language that had appeared in the 2008 Platform, but had been omitted from this year's document:

We need a government that stands up for the hopes, values and interests of working people, and gives everyone willing to work hard the chance to make the most of their God-given potential.

The Republicans had strongly criticized the omission of this sentence since it meant that the word "God" did not appear anywhere in the Democratic Platform, while the Republican Platform uses the word "God" 12 times. (See prior related posting.) The 2012 Democratic Platform did already have a section on Faith. (See prior posting.) The vote today also restored language from the 2008 Platform recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. Procedurally the amendment required a 2/3 vote, and Convention chairman Antonio Villaraigosa took the voice vote 3 times in a row before declaring the Platform amendments had passed.

European Court Hears 4 British Cases On Accommodating Christian Employees' Beliefs

Yesterday the European Court of Human Rights held a Chamber hearing on four cases from the United Kingdom raising issues of religious accommodation.  The cases are Chaplin v. the United Kingdom (application no. 59842/10), Eweida v. the United Kingdom (no. 48420/10), Ladele v. the United Kingdom (no. 51671/10) and McFarlane v. the United Kingdom (no. 36516/10). (Links are to prior postings on each case.) As reported by EurActiv, two of the cases involved Christians women who were not permitted by their employers to wear a cross around their neck. The other two cases involve Christian employees who object on religious grounds to same-sex marriage. One refused to provide counseling to same-sex couples. The other case involves a registrar who refused to officiate at same-sex civil union ceremonies. The European Court has issued a press release describing the cases, and has posted a webcast of the hearing.