Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Clark v. Cambria County Prison, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 179789 (WD PA, Dec. 20, 2012), a Pennsylvania federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 181044,  Nov. 15, 2012) and dismissed an inmate's complaint that his prison does not have separate Jehovah's Witness religious services.

In Davidson v. Masley, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182293 (SD NY, Dec. 19, 2012), a New York federal district court refused to reconsider its dismissal for lack of prosecution of a suit by an inmate challenging the manner in which halal food is furnished to inmates at Rikers Island.

In Whittier v. Arpaio, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182155 (D AZ, Dec. 27, 2012), an Arizona federal district court dismissed, with leave to amend, an inmate's complaint that he does not have access to church services because of his classification.

Court Grants Mennonite-Owned Business TRO In Challenge To Contraceptive Coverage Mandate

In Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. v. Sebelius, (ED PA, Dec. 28, 2012), a Pennsylvania federal district court issued a 14-day temporary restraining order barring enforcement of the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage mandate against a cabinet and wood specialties company whose Mennonite owners object on religious grounds to furnishing coverage for contraceptives they consider abortifacients. (See prior posting.) The TRO is limited to "the  provision  of  insurance coverage  for  the contraceptive services to which Plaintiffs object on religious grounds." The court set a hearing on a preliminary injunction for Jan. 4.  In granting the TRO, the court said:

In light of the opinions of several courts favoring Plaintiffs’ position in this case, we find that Plaintiffs have demonstrated a reasonable probability of success on the merits of their RFRA  claim.  While  additional  evidence is  necessary to  determine  whether Plaintiffs’ likelihood of success is sufficient to justify an injunction for the duration of the litigation, we find it to be adequate to warrant temporary relief pending a preliminary injunction hearing.

Philadelphia Inquirer reports on the decision.

Missouri City's Ordinance Is Overbroad In Likely Covering KKK Leafleting

In Traditionalist American Knights of the Ku Klux Klan v. City of Desloge, Missouri, (ED MO, Dec. 27, 2012), a Missouri federal district court issued a preliminary injunction against enforcement of a Missouri city's anti-solicitation ordinance because it was drafted so broadly that it likely covers expressive conduct on sidewalks, curbs, medians, and alleyways, as well as on streets.  The court found the ordinance to be overbroad and not narrowly tailored to serve a significant governmental interest.  Plaintiffs in the case, a KKK chapter, wanted to hand out leaflets on topics such as as the impact of Shariah law on the United States, risks to "White Americans" from racially-motivated attacks, information about Klansmen, and risks posed by methamphetamine.

7th Circuit: Contraceptive Coverage Mandate Imposes Substantial Free Exercise Burden On Business Owners

The U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday, in a 2-1 decision, issued an injunction pending appeal preventing enforcement of the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage mandate against a small for-profit construction company. The company's Catholic owners say the mandate violates their religious liberty.  In Korte v. Sebelius, (7th Cir., Dec. 28, 2012), the court explicitly disagreed with the 10th Circuit's holding last week in the Hobby Lobby case that the mandate did not impose a substantial burden on religious exercise. (See prior posting.)  The 7th Circuit majority said:

we think this misunderstands the substance of the claim. The religious‐liberty violation at issue here inheres in the coerced coverage of contraception, abortifacients, sterilization, and related services, not—or perhaps more precisely, not only—in the later purchase or use of contraception or related services.... [T]he Kortes have established a reasonable likelihood of success on their claim that the contraception mandate imposes a substantial burden on their religious exercise.

In the case, an Illinois federal district court (see prior posting) had found no substantial burden, in part because the company's current health insurance plan covers contraceptives. Apparently plaintiffs were unaware of this until shortly before they filed the current lawsuit. The 7th Circuit majority said: "it is well‐established that a religious believer does not, by inadvertent nonobservance, forfeit or diminish his free‐exercise rights."

Judge Rovner dissented, concluding that plaintiffs had not shown either irreparable harm or a likelihood of success on the merits, saying:

What the Kortes wish to do is to preemptively declare that their company need not pay for insurance which covers particular types of medical care to which they object, despite the fact that neither the company nor its owners are involved with the decision to use particular services, nor do they write the checks to pay the providers for those services.

American Center for Law and Justice issued a press release announcing the decision. Reuters today reports on the decision.

Two Suits Challenge Tax Code Favoritism For Churches

This month, two separate lawsuits were filed claiming that the Internal Revenue Service unconstitutionally favors religious organizations and churches over other non-profit organizations. On Dec. 20, American Atheists announced that, along with two state organizations, it has filed suit in a Kentucky federal district court challenging numerous provisions that advantage religious non-profits.  The complaint (full text) in American Atheists, Inc. v. Shulman, (ED KY, filed 12/20/2012), alleges that churches and many religious organizations are not required to submit an application for a Section 501(c)(3) exemption or pay the fee for applying that is imposed on other non-profits; they are not required to make annual informational filings on Form 990 with the IRS; special procedures need to be followed before civil tax examinations are instituted for churches and religious organizations; and churches are able to take advantage of the parsonage exemption. Plaintiffs allege that this violates the establishment clause and denies them equal protection of the laws. They also claim that this violates the religious test prohibition in Art. VI, Sec. 3 of the Constitution because "501(c)(3) entities are public Trusts."

Meanwhile, this week the Freedom From Religion Foundation, announced a new lawsuit (filed along with one of its local affiliates) challenging the exemption for churches and affiliated organizations from filing an application to obtain non-profit status, paying a filing fee and from filing annual reports on Form 990.  The complaint (full text) in Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Miller, (WD WI, filed 12/27/2012), claims that these exemptions violate the establishment clause and plaintiffs' equal protection rights. FFRF has previously filed suits challenging the parsonage allowance and the IRS' non-enforcement of electioneering restrictions against churches. (See prior postings 1,  2). Friendly Atheist blog reports on both of this month's cases. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Harsh Sharia Law Applied By Islamists In Northern Mali

The New York Times reported yesterday on the application of a harsh version of sharia law in northern Mali.  Since the Islamist takeover of the region last spring, at least 14 people convicted of theft have had their hand amputated as punishment. Some cases involve theft of guns for use in helping Mali to retake the north. The article has a particularly brutal description of amputation of the hand of the brother of the police commissioner of Gao.  One case of a couple being stoned to death for having children out of wedlock has also been reported. Dozens of others people have been publicly flogged with camel-hair whips or tree branches for smoking in pubic or playing music on the radio. Also, only Koranic verses can be used as cell phone ring tones. Trials are rudimentary, and sentences are often carried out quickly.

Islamic Nations Continue Objections To Certain Proposed gTLDs; Iran Files Late Submittals

As previously reported, last June the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) published a list applications for new generic Top-Level Domain (gTLD) names. Several organizations applied for gTLD's that have, or may have, a religious connection or connotation. (See prior posting.) Members of ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee had until Nov. 20 to file official "early warnings" to applicants raising concerns over specific applications. In that process, several early warnings for proposed religious-related gTLDs were filed. The UAE expressed concern over .islam and .halal.  India raised questions on .islam, .bible, .ram and .halal. (Full ICANN List of GAC Early Warnings). As reported by BNA Electronic Commerce and Law Report yesterday [subscription required], ICANN has now posted a new page linking to correspondence from Government Advisory Committee members  submitted after the early warning deadline.  The only items included so far are from Iran which has targeted 29 gTLD proposals, most because they refer to activities prohibited or regulated by Islamic religious law--proposed gTLDs such as .gay, .poker, .wine.  Iran wants these applications to be withdrawn or rejected, or else wants applicants to provide for the blocking of these domains in countries that object to them. For certain other objectionable domains, such as .imamat, Iran says concerns are so great that only withdrawal or rejection of the application is acceptable to it. Earlier in the process, Saudi Arabia had filed objections to a number of the same top level domain names that are now targeted by Iran. (See prior posting.)

District Court Finds Contraceptive Mandate Does Not Substantially Burden Religious Exercise

Yesterday in Grote Industries, LLC v. Sebelius, (SD IN, Dec. 27, 2012), an Indiana federal district court refused to grant a preliminary injunction to a for-profit business that manufactures vehicle safety systems and its Catholic owners who claim that their religious liberty rights are infringed by the contraceptive coverage mandate under the Affordable Care Act.  The company currently operates a self-insured health plan that excludes coverage for abortifacient drugs, contraception, and sterilization for its 464 full-time employees.  The plan is not a grandfathered one, so that the coverage requirements take effect on Jan. 1.  Focusing on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act challenge, the court held that the mandate does not impose a substantial burden on plaintiffs' free exercise rights. Citing in particular the O'Brien case, a recent Missouri federal district court decision reaching the same conclusion (see prior posting), the court concluded that the burden imposed by the mandate "is likely too remote and attenuated to be considered a substantial burden." It held that its analysis is not changed by the fact that here the plan is a self-insured one.

Acknowledging that Plaintiffs object not just to the use of contraceptives, but to furnishing coverage for them, the court quoted O'Brien's language:

RFRA is a shield, not a sword.  It protects individuals from substantial burdens on religious exercise that occur when the government coerces action one’s religion forbids, or forbids action one’s religion requires; it is not a means to force one’s religious practices upon others. RFRA does not protect against the slight burden on religious exercise that arises when one’s money circuitously flows to support the conduct of other free-exercise-wielding individuals who hold religious beliefs that differ from one’s own...

The court added:

We can imagine a wide variety of individual behaviors that might give rise to religiously-based scruples or opposition, such as alcohol consumption or using drugs or tobacco, or homosexual-related behaviors, all of which can threaten health conditions requiring treatment and care.  If the financial support for health care coverage of which Plaintiffs complain constitutes a substantial burden, secular companies owned by individuals objecting on religious grounds to such behaviors, including those businesses owned by individuals objecting on religious grounds to all modern medical care, could seek exemptions from employer-provided health care coverage for a myriad of health care needs, or for that matter, for any health care at all to its employees.

The court went on to reject 1st Amendment free exercise, establishment clause and free speech challenges, as well as due process and Administrative Procedure Act claims.  It found that the mandate is likely a neutral law of general applicability. It rejected a "compelled speech" argument saying that any subsidy for education and counseling services merely involves speech incidental to the conduct of receiving health care.

4 FFRF Signs Countering Christmas Displays Are Stolen Or Vandalized

In a news release yesterday, the Freedom from Religion Foundation reported that it has put up Winter Solstice banners or signs in 12 cities this year to counter religious displays on public property. Many of the banners use text that calls religion "myth & supestition." However the FFRF signs have been stolen or vandalized in 4 locations-- the Boston Commons; next door to a police station in Gladwin, Michigan; in Warren, Michigan; and in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania where the sign was vandalized in front of TV cameras.

Homeowners Sue New Mexico County Challenging Its Zoning Settlement With UDV Church

Wednesday's Santa Fe New Mexican reports on a state court lawsuit by six New Mexico homeowners challenging on constitutional grounds the decision by Santa Fe County  to settle a lawsuit filed by O Centro Espírita Beneficente União do Vegetal (UDV).  UDV, a church that uses a hallucinogenic tea as a sacrament, sought county zoning approval to build a temple, a guesthouse for a clergy member, and a greenhouse, as well as renovating a yurt, on property of Seagram’s whiskey heir Jeffrey Bronfman who is a local UDV leader. (Background.) The County Commission voted 3-2 to deny the required permits, saying that the construction was incompatible with the neighborhood.  UDV sued in federal district court charging religious discrimination. [corrected]  This led the county to negotiate a settlement with UDV under which the county would approve a new temple, but not a greenhouse or yurt. UDV would limit the times and number of people attending services.  The county agreed it would also pay $300,000 to extend a waterline and install a fire hydrant on the property, and would spend another $80,000 for a waste water system there.  Plaintiffs in the state court lawsuit claim that these expenditures would violate the anti-donation clause of the state constitution as well as the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution. [Thanks to Steven Siegel for the correction above.]

Iran Bars Overflights During Call-To-Prayer Times

The New York Times reported yesterday that Iran's Civil Aviation Organization has issued a directive prohibiting all aircraft from flying across the country during Adhan, the 5-times daily Muslim call for prayer. However the directive did not indicate whether planes in flight would be re-routed or forced to land.  Also under the new directive, no planes may take off in the morning until 30 minutes after the pre-dawn call to prayer. The head of the Civil Aviation Organization said the new rules were designed to give air travelers the time to carry out their religious duties. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

President Extends Best Wishes To Those Celebrating Kwanzaa

The White House yesterday issued a statement (full text) from the President and the First Lady extending best wishes to all those celebrating Kwanzaa. The statement describes the festival as a "week-long celebration of African-American history and culture through the seven principles of Kwanzaa: unity, self determination, collective work and responsibility, cooperative economics, purpose, creativity, and faith."

Parents Sue Rabbi For Sexual Assault and Defamation After He Received Light Criminal Sentence

Yesterday's Albany (NY) Times-Union reports on a civil suit for sexual assault and defamation that has been brought in state court in Albany County, New York against a former Chabad rabbi. In January 2010, Rabbi Yaakov Weiss plead guilty to misdemeanor charges of child endangerment after admitting inappropriate sexual contact with two 13-year old boys. Apparently Weiss' conduct with the boys took place in a mikveh (ritual purification pool). Under the plea agreement, Weiss was sentenced to 60 days in jail and 3 years probation, and was not required to register as a sexual offender. Weiss has also been suspended from his position with the local Chabad organization.  The boys parents, upset at the light sentence Weiss received, have now filed this civil suit which will come to trial next month. The defamation charges in the suit stem from Weiss' claim that the boys' allegations were "100% untrue." Meanwhile Weiss has complained to a rabbinical tribunal in Rockland County about the parents filing of the civil lawsuit.  The religious tribunal could potentially excommunicate the parents for bringing the lawsuit in civil court rather than submitting it to a religious tribunal for adjudication.

Justice Sotomayor Denies Injunction Pending Appeal In Hobby Lobby's Contraceptive Coverage Challenge

As previously reported, Hobby Lobby Stores and its sister corporation Mardel, Inc. have been seeking a temporary injunction to prevent enforcement of the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage mandate against them as they litigate their religious liberty challenges to the health care insurance rule.  After the 10th Circuit denied them an injunction, they sought a injunction from Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor in her role as Circuit Justice.  Yesterday, Sotomayor refused to grant the injunction.  In an in chambers opinion in Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. v. Sebelius, (Sup. Ct., Dec. 26, 2012), Justice Sotomayor wrote in part:

Applicants do not satisfy the demanding standard for the extraordinary relief they seek.  First, whatever the ultimate merits of the applicants’ claims, their entitlement to relief is not “indisputably clear.”... This Court has not previously addressed similar RFRA or free exercise claims brought by closely held for-profit corporations and their controlling shareholders alleging that the mandatory provision of certain employee benefits substantially burdens their exercise of religion.... Moreover, the applicants correctly recognize that lower courts have diverged on whether to grant temporary injunctive relief to similarly situated plaintiffs raising similar claims....

AP reports on the decision, as does SCOTUS Blog.

UPDATE: Following Justice Sotomayor's decision, the Becket Fund, counsel for Hobby Lobby announced:

Hobby Lobby will continue their appeal before the Tenth Circuit. The Supreme Court merely decided not to get involved in the case at this time. It left open the possibility of review after their appeal is completed in the Tenth Circuit. The company will continue to provide health insurance to all qualified employees. To remain true to their faith, it is not their intention, as a company, to pay for abortion-inducing drugs.

Company Settles EEOC Suit Alleging Refusal To Hire 7th Day Adventist

The EEOC announced last week that Altec Industries, Inc., a Birmingham, Alabama based manufacturing company, has agreed to settle a religious discrimination lawsuit brought against it by the EEOC. The suit claims that Altec refused to hire Seventh Day Adventist, James Wright, at its Burnsville, N.C. manufacturing  facility after it learned that Wright could not work on his Sabbath (sundown Friday to sundown Saturday).  Altec will pay $25,000 in damages to Wright, and will also provide training on religious discrimination to certain managers and supervisors, post notices of employee rights and report periodically to the EEOC.

Government Agrees That Priests for Life Qualifies For ACA Mandate Enforcement Safe-Harbor

Last January, the Department of Health and Human Services announced that it would impose a moratorium on enforcement of the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage mandate until August 1, 2013  for non-profit employers who, based on religious beliefs, did not currently provide contraceptive coverage in their insurance plan. (See prior posting.) In August of this year, HHS issued a Guidance on the Temporary Enforcement Safe Harbor confirming that the temporary enforcement safe harbor would be in effect until the first plan year that begins on or after August 1, 2013 for non-profit employers with conscience exemptions which have consistently not provided contraceptive coverage in the past. Now in Priests for Life v. Sebelius, (ED NY, Dec. 21, 2012), the parties have filed a stipulation in a New York federal district court agreeing that Priests for Life qualifies for the temporary enforcement safe harbor. Priests for Life will provide a notice to its health plan participants that contraceptive services will not be covered during the safe-harbor period. The stipulation comes one day after oral arguments in Priests for Life's challenge to the mandate. (Press release from American Freedom Law Center.)  (See prior related posting.)

Top 10 Church-State and Religious Liberty Developments For 2012

Here are my nominations for the 2012 Top Ten Church-State and Religious Liberty Developments:

1.  The long-simmering tensions between the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Obama Administration took on a greater focus when in May some 40 Catholic institutions, in 12 lawsuits, filed challenges to the Obama administration's mandate that health insurance policies include contraceptive coverage. Other suits followed. The Administration had granted a one-year moratorium to non-profit institutions, while it worked unsuccessfully to produce a compromise that might be acceptable to religiously affiliated non-profit institutions. Meanwhile, for-profit companies owned by Catholics and conservative Christians also filed an avalanche of suits seeking conscience exemptions from the mandate.

2.  The battle between religious conservatives and advocates of marriage equality continued to rage on numerous fronts.  Each side saw some victories and some defeats, but proponents of marriage equality had a good year.  Legislatures in Washington and Maryland approved same-sex marriage. In November, voters in 4 states also indicated approval of same-sex marriage, but earlier in the year North Carolina voters approved a ban on same-sex marriage.. The 9th Circuit in a narrow opinion struck down California's Proposition 8, and the Supreme Court has agreed to review that decision. The Defense of Marriage Act was struck down by the 1st Circuit, the 2nd Circuit and a California federal district court. The Supreme Court has agreed to review the 2nd Circuit case. Same-sex marriage bans in Nevada and Hawaii were upheld by federal district courts.

 3.  Mitt Romney lost the Presidential election, but his Mormon religious faith was not an important issue in the campaign. Indeed, Romney's activities as a lay Mormon pastor were used to his advantage at the Republican Convention.

4. The Supreme Court in Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC adopted the "ministerial exception" doctrine for employment discrimination cases, finding it to be constitutionally-based.

5.  Egypt has struggled to draft and adopt a new constitution.  The role the new constitution will provide for Sharia law in the country has been one of the central issues in debates on the document.

6.  A 17-year long struggle by the New York City Board of Education to bar churches from renting out school buildings on weekends for church services, even though the buildings are available to other community groups, was revived by a federal district judge. Most observers had thought that a 2011 decision by the 2nd Circuit had ended the dispute in favor of the Board of Education, but the court held that the 2nd Circuit had not passed on the Bronx Household of Faith's free exercise and establishment clause claims. The district court's vindication of the free exercise claim is now on appeal.

7.  An online video promoting the obscure movie "Innocence of Muslims" triggers demonstrations against American embassies in the Muslim world. The video leads to an unusual set of legal proceedings-- litigation involving probation violations by the producer, attempt by an actress in the movie to have it removed from YouTube, and in abstentia convictions in Egypt.

8.  New questions are raised around the world regarding ritual circumcision of young boys by Muslims and Jews. Germany's Bundestag confirmed the legality of religious circumcision after a Cologne district court held that parents lack the right to decide that their young sons should be circumcised for non-medical reasons. Ritual circumcision is also questioned in Australia and Norway. Meanwhile, in the United States some Orthodox Jewish groups sue challenging the New York City health department's new regulation requiring informed consent from parents when a Jewish religious circumcision involves use of the oral suction technique (metzitzah b'peh).

9.  The court martial trial of accused Fort Hood mass shooter Maj. Nidal Hasan is delayed as the question of his right to wear a beard for religious reasons at his trial is litigated.  In December, an appeals court held there was insufficient evidence to show that the beard materially interfered with the court martial proceedings. It also ordered court martial judge Gregory Gross removed from the case for the appearance of bias.

10.  In the wake of Congress' reorganization of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom in late 2011, developments demonstrated internal divisions and conflicts in the Commission. The pressure of expiring terms of 5 Commissioners led to early release of USCIRF's annual report and to a public statement by 5 of the Commissioners charging that the report wrongly reflected the votes of Commissioners on the status of Turkey.  Meanwhile a former USCIRF staff member sued alleging anti-Muslim bias against her.  In an unrelated case, a different employee was sentenced to prison for embezzling USCIRF funds. And Muslim groups criticized one of the new Commissioners, claiming he is anti-Muslim.

Some of my picks were rather obvious candidates for inclusion, while others may surprise some readers. A number of the top developments continue trends reflected in last year's list.  You may also find it interesting to compare two other "Top 10" lists: Religion Newswriters 2012 Top 10 Religion Stories and Blog from the Capital's Top Religious Liberty Stories of 2012. I invite you to post your comments or disagreements with my choices this year.

Official Results: Egyptian Voters Approve Constitution By 63.8% Vote

Egypt's Supreme Election Committee told a news conference today that the country's new constitution has been approved by 63.8% of those casting votes.  According to Al-Jazeera, the election commission says it reviewed every complaint that has been filed by independent and opposition election monitors, and has rejected all of them.  The official turnout for the election, held in two parts on Dec. 15 and 22, was 32.9% of the country's 52 million eligible voters.  Earlier this month, National Review published an excellent analysis of the provisions in the new constitution that relate to religious freedom and protection of the rights of minorities. The document was drafted largely by Islamists after representatives of non-Islamist parties and the Coptic Christian minority withdrew in protest from the Constitutional Assembly that was drafting the document. (See prior related posting.)

UPDATE: Reuters reports on Wednesday that President Morsi has signed the new constitution into law.

Obamas Wish Everyone Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays

President Obama and the First Lady used the President's weekly address (full text) last Saturday to extend wishes for a Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to everyone.  In the address, the Obamas made special mention of military families, and the President also said:

For my family and millions of Americans, it’s a time to celebrate the birth of Christ. To reflect on His life and learn from His example.  Every year, we commit to love one another.  To give of ourselves.  To be our brother’s keeper.  To be our sister’s keeper.  But those ideas are not just part of our faith.  They’re part of all faiths.  And they unite us as Americans.

A video of the address is available online.

IRS Seizes Synagogue and Day School For Back Taxes

JTA reported yesterday that in Worcester, Massachusetts, the Internal Revenue Service has seized a building housing a synagogue and Jewish day school for non-payment of taxes. The school owes over $435,000 in taxes dating back to 2004-- mostly payroll taxes that have not been paid. A public auction of the building is scheduled for January 4. In the meantime, Yeshiva Achei Tmimim synagogue and Yeshiva Academy day school continue to operate.