Religion Clause

Tuesday, December 11, 2012

Canadian Court Upholds Required Ethics and Religious Culture Program In Catholic School

LifeSite News reports that in Canada, Quebec's Court of Appeal has upheld the decision of the province's Minister of Education, Recreation and Sports refusing to exempt a Catholic school, Loyola High School, from the requirement that it offer a government-mandated course in Ethics and Religious Culture instead of the school's own course covering other religions and ethical creeds from a Catholic perspective. A trial court ruled in favor of the school (see prior posting), but the Court of Appeal reversed. In Le Procureur General du Quebec v. Loyola High School John Zucchi, (Quebec Ct. App., Dec. 4, 2012) the Court of Appeal held that "exposing students to the global study of religions in a neutral perspective without requiring them to adhere to it, is not an infringement of freedom of religion." In reaching this conclusion, the court cited a February decision by Canada's Supreme Court upholding the Ethics and Religious Culture Program in a suit by parents who objected to it. (See prior posting.)

Court Finds North Carolina's Pro-Life Plates Unconstitutional

In American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina v. Conti, (ED NC, Dec. 7, 2012), a North Carolina federal district court held that North Carolina's "offering of a Choose Life license plate in the absence of a pro-choice plate constitutes viewpoint discrimination in violation of the First Amendment." The court reached this conclusion after rejecting arguments that the specialty license plate program was government speech. The court pointed out that the North Carolina legislature, with rancorous debate, rejected six proposals for various pro-choice plates. The ACLU issued a press release announcing the decision. CNN reports on the decision.

New Report Focuses on Global Discrimination Against Humanists and Atheists

To mark Human Rights Day yesterday, Britain's International Humanist and Ethical Union issued (press release) the first report focusing on discrimination around the world against non-religious people. Titled Freedom of Thought 2012: A Global Report on Discrimination Against Humanists, Atheists and the Non-religious, the 72-page report covers laws and cases of discrimination country-by-country. Summarizing its findings, the report says in part:

This report shows that atheists, humanists and other nonreligious people are discriminated against by governments across the world. There are laws that deny atheists’ right to exist, curtail their freedom of belief and expression, revoke their right to citizenship, restrict their right to marry, obstruct their access to public education, prohibit them from holding public office, prevent them from working for the state, criminalize their criticism of religion, and execute them for leaving the religion of their parents.....

A handful of countries criminalize atheism per se. In addition, there are several forms of legal measures found across many countries that either criminalize the expression of atheist beliefs or result in systematic discrimination against atheists and those who reject religion. These include laws regulating:

• Apostasy and religious conversion
• Blasphemy and religious criticism
• Compulsory religious registration, usually with a list of permissible religions
• Religious tests for citizenship or participation in civic life
• Religious control of family law
• Religious control of public education.

MSN News and Voice of Russia both cover the Report.

National Menorah Lighting Ceremony Held Sunday

As reported by CNN, on Sunday night Chabad Rabbi Levi Shemtov presided over the lighting of the National Menorah on the Ellipse south of the White House. The ceremony featured the U.S. Navy Band. Jeffrey Zients, deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget, helped light the first candle.

Plaintiffs Challenging 10 Commandments May Proceed Using Pseudonyms

As previously reported, in September the Freedom From Religion Foundation along with two students and their parents filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a 6-foot tall Ten Commandments monument that has been displayed for decades in front of New Kensington, Pennsylvania's Valley High School. On Nov. 30, the trial court judge ruled (full text of Order) that the students and the parent of one may proceed in the case identified only as Doe 1, Doe 2 and Doe 3. As reported yesterday by the Valley News Dispatch, plaintiffs' counsel had sought the order because of "the highly personal and sensitive religious matters involved, the age of the student-Plaintiffs, the (ill will) expressed by the public regarding the Plaintiffs and this case, harassing remarks about the Plaintiffs, and the potential for physical harm." Plaintiffs introduced as evidence of the hostility toward them Facebook postings, website comments, emails and letters to the editor.

Monday, December 10, 2012

FBI Releases 2011 Hate Crimes Data; 19.8% Are Motivated By Anti-Religious Bias

The FBI today released its 2011 Hate Crime Statistics. The report shows that there were 6,216 single-bias motivated incidents reported, of which 1,233 (19.8%) involved religious bias. For comparison, for 2010 the FBI reported 6,624 single-bias incidents, with 1,322 (20%) motivated by religious bias-- though the reporting jurisdictions were not identical in the two years. (See prior posting.) The 2011 data show that of the 1,233 incidents motivated by religious bias, 771 of those were anti-Jewish; 157 were anti-Islamic; 67 were anti-Catholic; 44 were anti-Protestant; and 4 were anti-Atheist or Agnostic. Fully 130, however, involved bias against other religions. As previously reported, efforts are underway to add anti-Sikh and anti-Hindu subcategories in order to refine the "Other Religion" number. In 2011, crimes motivated by religious bias were the third most frequent category of hate crimes. Racial bias ranked first (2,917 incidents), and bias based on sexual orientation ranked second (1,293 incidents). The ADL issued a press release welcoming the 6% decrease in hate crimes since last year, but saying this is still far too many. [Thanks to Michael Lieberman for the lead.]

In Canada, Scams Are Reviving Use Of Ban On Fraudulent Use Of Sorcery

Last Saturday's National Post reports that new scams are leading Canadian authorities to revive prosecutions under an an old statute (Canada Criminal Code Sec. 365) that prohibits fraudulently pretending "to exercise or to use any kind of witchcraft, sorcery, enchantment or conjuration." Last month, charges under the section were filed against Gustavo Gomez who, using Spanish-language radio and print ads in Quebec and Ontario convinced people they were under a curse. He then offered to lift the curse for $10,000 to $15,000. In Toronto, a similar curse-lifting scam is being carried out in the city's Chinese community. Cantonese-speaking residents are warned of a curse and are convinced to fill a bag with valuables for a special ritual to lift it. Then the fraudster runs off with the bag. Vancouver police are reporting similar scams.

Sunday, December 09, 2012

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Kramer v. Pollard, (7th Cir., Dec. 5, 2012), the 7th Circuit rejected an Odinist inmate's claim for damages on qualified immunity grounds. At issue were claimed free exercise and equal protection violations growing out of the refusal to allow group worship for Odinists separate from other Pagan groups. However the court reversed the dismissal of plaintiff's religious diet claim.

In Riddick v. Herlock, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 171855 (ED VA, Nov. 30, 2012), a Virginia federal district court deferred ruling on dismissal of an inmate's claim that his copy of the Qur'an was confiscated so plaintiff could amend his complaint.

In People ex rel. Day v New York State Dept. of Corrections and Community Supervision, (NY Supr. Ct., Nov. 30, 2012), a New York trial court held that an inmate was denied due process when his parole violation hearing was held in abstentia, but the reason for his absence was his Muslim Friday religious observance.

In Johnson v. Director VDOC, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173203 (WD VA, Dec. 6, 2012), a Virginia federal district court dismissed an inmate's complaint that the Department of Corrections banned his "Nuwaupian Moorish" religion and therefore he cannot have religious DVDs or CDs in DOC facilities.

In Benton v. Yon, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173197 (ND FL, Dec. 6, 2012), a Florida federal district court, rejecting a magistrate's recommendation (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173196, Oct. 22, 2012) that plaintiff be permitted to proceed on most of his claims, dismissed on qualified immunity grounds an inmate's complaint that his free exercise and equal protection rights were infringed when a correctional officer tore and crumbled pages in plaintiff's Qur'an and drenched his prayer rug with water, apparently out of bias toward Muslims. According to the court: "no authoritative court has decided—as a broad principle—that a correctional officer's disrespectful treatment of an inmate's religious property ... was unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments even when, as in this case, there is no allegation that such treatment burdened the inmate's ability to practice his religion."

In Forter v. Geer, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54400 (D OR, April 17, 2012), an Oregon federal district court dismissed an inmate's free exercise and RLUIPA complaint regarding withholding from him of certain Christian Identity material sent to him. The court also dismissed without prejudice other claims for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. [This case while several months old was not previously covered by Religion Clause.]

Court Rejects Quaker's Challenge To Tax Procedures Invoked After Anti-War Withholding Of Amounts Due

In Boardman v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, (ED CA, Dec. 6, 2012), a California federal district court dismissed free exercise claims by a Quaker peace activist who challenged provisions of the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 (26 USC Sec. 6330(g)) that curtail the administrative appeals process for "frivolous" taxpayer claims. The provision was invoked when plaintiff withheld half of her tax payments due because of her objections to government spending on war. She said she would pay the remaining amounts only if they were redirected to peaceful purposes. Relying on the 1st Amendment and RFRA, plaintiff argued that the government intentionally frustrated her religious beliefs by depriving her of rights and procedures that would have been available had she not asserted a religious motive for withholding a portion of her taxes. The court held that the Anti-Injunction Act (26 U.S.C. § 7421) requires dismissal of the lawsuit, since a ruling in favor of plaintiff would negatively impact the government's tax assessment methods. Alternatively, the court dismissed on the merits, holding that under past precedent plaintiff may not assert a religious objection to the country's tax system, even if she does not dispute her overall tax liability.

DNA Testing For Immigration Purposes Is Neutral Rule of General Applicability In Free Exercise Claim

In S. T. v. Napolitano, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 172658 (SD TX, Dec. 5, 2012), a Texas federal district court held that there is no 1st Amendment free exercise problem with denial of plaintiff's certificate of citizenship, passport and related documents. S.T.'s parents-- both American citizens-- practice the Swaminarayan religion. They believe they are required to follow their swami's religious instruction to never subject S.T., as a gift from a divine source, to medical testing. U.S. officials refuse to certify S.T. as a child of American citizens born abroad without DNA testing to establish a blood relationship. The court rejected the claim that requiring DNA testing violates the 1st Amendment free exercise rights of S.T. and his parents, finding that the testing requirement is a neutral rule of general applicability. However the court and defendants agreed that plaintiff may assert his claim under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act

Saturday, December 08, 2012

Bankruptcy Judge Shields Parish Assets In Archdiocese Bankruptcy

In the bankruptcy reorganization proceedings of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee (WI), a federal bankruptcy judge has refused to include at least most of the assets of separately incorporated parishes as part of the assets which creditors of the Archdiocese can claim. In In re Archdiocese of Milwaukee, (ED WI Bankr., Dec. 7, 2012), the court refused to apply the "alter ego" doctrine to ignore the separate corporate status of the parishes:

The Committee has failed to state a plausible claim that the Debtor and Parishes failed to observe corporate formalities, that funds were siphoned, that officers or directors of the Parishes were nonfunctional, or that there was an absence of corporate records. Absolutely no facts were alleged to make plausible a claim that the Debtor and the Parishes “egregiously ignored” corporate formalities or that control was so "pervasively exercised" to apply the alter ego doctrine in this case.

The court similarly refused to apply the equitable doctrine of substantive consolidation to make parish assets available to creditors. Reporting on the decision, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel says that the parishes, however, could still face claims that creditors should have access to $35 million in funds that the Archdiocese moved off its books in 2005.

L.A. Church Sues Former Pastor, His Wife and Others For Fiduciary Breaches and Fraud

The Los Angeles Times reports that last Tuesday a suit was filed in a California state court by the oldest Black church in Los Angeles against its former pastor John Hunter, his wife and a group of other church officials and directors of affiliated corporations in a battle for control of the church. According to the paper:

Hunter has had a rocky tenure at the church. Since taking over First AME in 2004, Hunter has been sued for sexual harassment, a civil claim that was settled for an undisclosed amount. The Times reported in 2008 that an internal audit found he charged $122,000 in jewelry, family vacations and clothing to the church's credit card. He later agreed to a nine-year repayment plan.

He earned a generous salary during his tenure, lived in a $2-million home and drove a Mercedes-Benz paid for by the church. His wife earned $147,000 a year running nonprofit organizations connected to the 19,000-member congregation.

But over the last few years, the hilltop church in the West Adams district has fallen into debt. The church owes nearly $500,000 to creditors and some vendors say they have not been paid in more than a year.

The complaint (full text) in First African Methodist Episcopal Church of Los Angeles v. Hunter, (CA Super. Ct., filed 12/4/2012), alleges that when John Hunter was transferred to a new church, his wife Denise continued to control affiliated corporations that provide social services rather than allowing FAME's new pastor to do so. It alleges breach of fiduciary duty, fraud and conversion. It asks for injunctive and declaratory relief and for damages of over $1 million.

New York Hasidic Sex Abuse Trial Uncovers Extortion From "Modesty Committees"

According to Thursday's New York Jewish Week, testimony in the Brooklyn sex abuse trial of Nechemya Weberman -- an unlicensed "therapist" to whom schools of the Hasidic Satmar sect referred "wayward" girls for "help" -- has disclosed important information about the insular Satmar community:

the alleged victim ... has been subjected to intense pressure to withdraw her claim, including intimidation, harassment, social ostracism of her family and even a reported $500,000 bribe.... The case is also significant for the amount of public support the alleged victim has received ... from her family, close friends and advocates, many of whom have used social media to spread the word about the trial and appeared in court....

However, many people with ties to the chasidic community believe there is something even more important about the Weberman case — namely, what it exposes about the larger communal role played by chasidic "modesty committees" in communities like Williamsburg, Borough Park and Kiryas Joel. These groups — to which, sources say, Weberman was connected — originated years ago to guard the "purity" of the community by enforcing strict dress and behavior codes that characterize the insular chasidic lifestyle. But, insiders say, the tactics of these self-appointed, freelance modesty patrols have evolved from public shaming to extortion and threats....

President Issues Hanukkah Greetings

Yesterday, the White House released a statement (full text) sending warmest wishes from the President and Michelle Obama to all those around the world celebrating Hanukkah. The statement said in part:

Hanukkah is a time to celebrate the faith and customs of the Jewish people, but it is also an opportunity for people of all faiths to recognize the common aspirations we share.... [L]et us reaffirm our commitment to building a better, more complete world for all.

The 8-day festival of Hanukkah begins this evening.

More On Yesterday's Same-Sex Marriage Cases Cert. Grant-- Standing

In granting certiorari yesterday in two same-sex marriage cases (see prior posting), the U.S. Supreme Court (order list) instructed the parties to brief and argue specified standing issues, in addition to the questions presented in the petitions for certiorari. In Dennis v. Perry, the California Proposition 8 case, the Court ordered the parties to brief and argue: "Whether petitioners have standing under Article III, §2 of the Constitution in this case." In United States v. Windsor, the Defense of Marriage Act case, the Court ordered the parties to brief and argue: "Whether the Executive Branch’s agreement with the court below that DOMA is unconstitutional deprives this Court of jurisdiction to decide this case; and whether the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the United States House of Representatives has Article III standing in this case."

Friday, December 07, 2012

Supreme Court Will Review 2 Same-Sex Marriage Cases

The U.S. Supreme Court today granted certiorari in two same-sex marriage cases. (Order List.) The first of the cases is Hollingsworth v. Perry, (Docket No. 12-144, cert. granted 12/7/2012). In the case, decided by the 9th Circuit under the caption Perry v. Brown, the appeals court in a 2-1 decision struck down California's Proposition 8 that eliminated the right-- previously created by the California Supreme Court's interpretation of the state constitution-- for same-sex couples to marry. Judge Reinhardt, in an opinion joined by Judge Hawkins, held that even though California may not have had the obligation to grant same-sex couples the right to marry, once it did, it could not take that right away without some legitimate reason for doing so. Here there was no legitimate reason. (See prior posting.) En banc review was denied, but in a decision generating dissenting and responding opinions. (See prior posting.) The certiorari petition (full text), however frames the issue more broadly:

Whether the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits the State of California from defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman.

Scotus blog has links to the 9th Circuit opinion and all the filings with the Supreme Court in the case.

The second case in which the Supreme Court granted review is United States v. Windsor, (Docket No. 12-307, cert. granted 12.7/2012). In the case, the 2nd Circuit in a 2-1 decision held that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional under the equal protection component of the 5th Amendment. In a suit by the surviving spouse of a lesbian couple who was denied the spousal deduction under the federal estate tax law, the majority held that it must apply heightened (intermediate level) scrutiny because homosexuals are a quasi-suspect classification. (See prior posting.) The petition for certiorari (full text)-- which was filed before the 2nd Circuit came down with its decision-- defines the question presented as:

Does Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, 1 U.S.C. § 7, which defines the term “marriage” for all purposes under federal law as “only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife,” deprive same-sex couples who are lawfully married under the laws of their states (such as New York) of the equal protection of the laws, as guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States?

Scotus blog has links to the 2nd Circuit opinion and all the filings with the Supreme Court in the case.

Press coverage of the Supreme Court's action today included the New York Times, Yahoo! News, and Wall Street Journal.

UPDATE: See follow-up post- "More On Yesterday's Same-Sex Marriage Cases Cert. Grant- Standing".

Santa Monica Park Rules Change Impacts Hanukkah As Well As Christmas Displays

A good deal of attention has been given by the media to the change in rules adopted in Santa Monica, California, ending the traditional Christmas story dioramas in Palisades Park during the holiday season. The new city ordinance, upheld by the courts, excludes unattended displays and has led a coalition of Christian groups plans to hold a Live Nativity Display instead. (See prior posting.) Less noticed has been the impact of the rule change on other displays. Yesterday's Los Angeles Jewish Journal reports that it also impacts the two 12-foot-tall, propane-fueled menorahs normally set up in the park by the Chabad of Santa Monica during Hanukkah. This year instead the menorahs will lit, and then moved away each night on pick-up trucks. The change also impacts the separate menorah lighting that has been held for the past 5 years on the Promenade sponsored by Downtown Santa Monica, Inc. They will now move their 10-foot tall menorah onto the Promenade on dollies each time it is to be lit, and then take it away.

New Trial Motion By Defendants Convicted In Amish Beard-Cutting Case Is Denied

In United States v. Mullet, (ND OH, Dec. 6, 2012), an Ohio federal district court denied a motion for a new trial by Bergholz Amish leader Samuel Mullet, Sr. and his co-defendants who were convicted in September of conspiring to violated the federal Hate Crimes Prevention Act in connection with beard- and hair-cutting attacks against a rival Amish group. (See prior posting.) The court rejected Mullet's argument that there was insufficient evidence to link him to the attacks, saying:

While it is true Defendant did not physically participate in any of the attacks, there was extensive evidence showing he was a member of the conspiracy the object of which was to commit them.... Defendant, as Bishop of Bergholz, ran his community with an iron fist—nothing of significance happened without his knowledge and approval. Even if the Government proved nothing more than that Samuel Mullet, Sr., was told about the attacks in advance by his followers and then said or did nothing to stop or prevent them, or even voice his disapproval, a jury could conclude that he had joined the conspiracy....

The court also rejected Mullet's argument regarding newly discovered evidence and his objections to evidence presented at trial of an AP article, and of his sexual relationship with one of his daughters-in-law. AP reports on the decision.

First Family Lights National Christmas Tree

USA Today reports that last night, President Obama, along with First Lady Michelle Obama and their daughters, lit the White House National Christmas Tree on the Ellipse. In his comments at the ceremony, Obama focused on families in the Northeast who were displaced by Hurricane Sandy. After pushing the button to light the tree, the First Family left the stage and sat in the audience to watch entertainment by Jason Mraz, Ledisi, James Taylor, Kenny "Babyface" Edmonds, Colbie Caillat and American Idol winner Phillip Phillips.

UPDATE: The full text of the President's remarks at the National Christmas Tree Lighting are now available from the White House.