Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Taylor v. United States, (Ct. Fed. Cl., Oct 25, 2013), the United States Court of Federal Claims dismissed for lack of jurisdiction a claim for damages and injunctive relief brought by an inmate serving a life sentence who claimed his rights were violated when USCIS refused to allow him to renounce his citizenship for religious reasons. USCIS says citizenship can only be renounced when an individual is outside the country.

In Montgomery v. Fondren, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147934 (ND AL, Oct. 15, 2013), an Alabama federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148212, Sept. 4, 2013) and dismissed an inmate's complaints that his request to see a Volunteer Faith Group Leader andview religious programming were denied,  and that he was placed in disciplinary segregation for preaching even though he received permission from the other prisoners to do so.

In Pannell v. Baserap, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147858 (ED VA, Oct. 10, 2013), a Virginia federal district court dismissed a complaint by a Muslim inmate that he was prohibited from conducting Jum'ah services in Arabic because of a prison rule that only English may be spoken in unsupervised cross-housing unit meetings.

In Trebas v. County of Fresno, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148436 (ED CA, Oct. 11, 2013), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed, with leave to amend, a complaint by a state hospital civil detainee that his free exercise rights were infringed when authorities refused his request for religious accommodation of single room housing.

In Hall v. Hehl, 2013 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 148852 (D NC, Oct. 16, 2013), a North Carolina federal district court dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies a claim by a Native American inmate that the handling of his religious property violated his free exercise rights.

In Sharrieff v. Moore, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150320 (MD PA, Oct. 18, 2013) a Pennsylvania federal district court permitted a Nation of Islam inmate to move ahead with a number of his claims growing out of the alleged denial to him of  religious services and annual December fasting accommodations.

In Muhammad v. Shearin, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149276 (D MD, Oct. 17, 2013), a Maryland federal district court dismissed a Nation of Islam inmate's 1st Amendment and RLUIPA challenges to the prison's refusal to recognize for some purposes plaintiff's court approved religious name change.  However plaintiff was permitted to move ahead with his due process challenge.

In Cottriel v. Jones, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150601 (WD OK, Oct. 21, 2013), an Oklahoma federal district court ordered the Oklahoma Department of Corrections to respond within 14 days to an Orthodox Jewish inmate's suit to hold authorities in contempt for not fully complying with a 2006 injunction ordering them to provide plaintiff with a kosher diet.

In Barfell v. Winnebago County Jail, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150941 (ED WI, Oct. 21, 2013), a Wisconsin federal district court rejected an inmate's complaint that while in segregation he was not permitted to attend church services or Bible study, since he could watch church services on TV and meet with the chaplain for individual Bible study.

In Porter v. Biter, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 149748 (ED CA, Oct. 16, 2013), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed, with leave to amend, a Muslim inmate's complaint that he was not permitted to change his name to comply with his religious beliefs.  Plaintiff did not allege that he was prohibited from using his religious name along with his committed name.

Formal Ethics Charges Filed Against Magistrate Who Rejected "Messiah" As Child's Name

On Wednesday, the Tennessee Board of Judicial Conduct filed formal charges (full text) against Child Support Magistrate Lu Ann Ballew who insisted that parents change their child's first name from "Messiah" to "Martin.", even though the only name issue in the case related to the child's last name.  Ballew gave as the reason that Messiah is a title held only by Jesus Christ. (See prior posting.)  The charges claim that Ballew violated rules requiring judges to promote confidence in the judiciary and avoid bias and prejudice based, among other things, on religion.  Reuters reports on developments. (See prior related posting.)

Egypt's Constitution Drafting Committee Remains Split Over Language On Country's Religious Identity

Asharq Al-Awsat reported yesterday that Egypt's 50-member constitution drafting committee remains split over several issues relating to Egypt's religious identity. According to a drafting committee member, Egypt's Coptic Christian community is concerned about Article 2 of the current Egyptian constitution that provides: “The state’s religion is Islam, its language is Arabic, and Islamic Shari’a is the source of its legislation.”  However Al-Azhar wants the provision to remain in order to defend Egypt's Islamic identity.

Also at issue is Article 219 provides: "The principles of Islamic Shari’a include its commonly accepted interpretations, its fundamental and jurisprudential rules, and its widely considered sources, as stated by the schools of Sunna and Gamaa."...  Liberals and secularists object to this provision, while the Salafist Al-Nour Party wants it to remain in the constitution.

Article 3 of the current constitution provides that "the canon principles of the People of the Book [Jews, Christians and Muslims] are the main source of legislation for their [respective] personal status laws, religious affairs and the selection of their spiritual leaders."  Disagreement continues over the wording of this clause. Egypt’s Coptic, Orthodox and Evangelical churches want "People of the Book" to be changed to "non-Muslims," while Al-Azhar and the Al-Nour Party want it to refer to "Christians and Jews." Al-Azhar is concerned that the broader-term "non-Muslims" would open the country to exploitation by other religions and sects.

Court Rejects Minister's Challenge To Social Security Number On Driver's License Application

In Carmichael v. Sebelius, (ED VA, Oct. 23, 2013), a Virginia federal district court dismissed a suit by a Christian minister challenging the federal requirement that states record an individual's social security number on his or her driver's license application as a condition of the state receiving federal funds for child support enforcement efforts.  Plaintiff David Carmichael believes that the social security number is the number of the Beast referred to in the Book of Revelation.  Therefore he has been attempting in lawsuits, first at the state level and then in federal court, to disassociate his identity from his social security number.  Among other things, the court held that there had not been a violation of Carmichael's religious liberty protected by the 1st Amendment and RFRA, saying in part:

Carmichael fails to allege a substantial burden on his religion from the SSN requirement. Indeed, Carmichael seems to allege only burdens on his secular life, such as his ability to drive his car....

The court also rejected Carmichael's 10th Amendment attack on the social security number requirement, and dismissed claims against state officials on the basis of the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and the doctrine of res judicata.

Air Force Academy Says "So Help Me God" Will Be Optional In Cadet Honor Oath

At the U.S. Air Force Academy, a Cadet Honor Oath is administered to all the cadets when they are formally accepted into the wing at the conclusion of Basic Cadet Training. The Honor Oath reads:

We will not lie, steal or cheat, nor tolerate among us anyone who does. Furthermore, I resolve to do my duty and to live honorably, so help me God.

The U.S. Air Force Academy announced yesterday that it is making the final clause of the Oath optional, "in the spirit of determining a way ahead that enables all to be true to their beliefs."  As reported by CNN, the change was made after a complaint was filed by the Military Religious Freedom Foundation.

When the Honor Oath was instituted, its last clause was patterned on the same clause in the Commissioning Oath.  In August, the Air Force revised it policies so that officer trainees now have the option of taking a secular Commissioning Oath. (See prior posting.)

Obama Names 3 To Holocaust Memorial Council

President Obama yesterday appointed three individuals to five-year terms on the 55-member Holocaust Memorial Council.  The new members, according to JTA, are Elisa Spungen Bildner, a New Jerssey business CEO who has held leadership positions in several Jewish organizations;  John Farahi, a Nevada casino CEO and founder of a Jewish day school; and Dana Perlman, vice president of the Los Angeles City Planning Commission and co-chair of the Democratic National Committee LGBT Leadership Council.

Ukrainian Appeals Court Rejects Jewish Community's Claim To Former Synagogue Building

In the Ukraine, the Odessa Administrative Court of Appeals earlier this month reversed a decision of the Balta District Court and rejected the claim of the Balta Jewish community to an abandoned building that once housed the 100-year old Savranskaya synagogue. According to a JTA report yesterday, the Jewish community paid 2500 rubles for construction of the building in 1903. However it stopped being used as a synagogue during the Holocaust years. The building was turned into apartments by the Soviet government, and subsequently Ukrtelecom, the Ukrainian national telecommunications operator, began to use the building and kept it after it was privatized in 2003.

Two Christian Colleges Sue Over Contraceptive Coverage Mandate

Dordt College, a Sioux City, Iowa college affiliated with the Christian Reformed Church, and the historically-Baptist Grand Rapids, Michigan based Cornerstone University on Wednesday filed suit in an Iowa federal district court.  The lawsuit, like numerous similar ones, challenges on religious liberty grounds the portion of the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage mandate that requires the schools' employee health insurance plans to cover contraceptives that the schools consider to be abortifacients. According to a Cornerstone press release and FAQ  document, both schools are being represented without cost by Alliance Defending Freedom. MLive reports on the lawsuit.

UPDATE: Here is the full text of the complaint in Dordt College v. Sebelius, (ND IA, filed 10/23/2013).

Description of Radical Islam In Indictment Does Not Violate Defendant's Religious Freedom

United States v. Bary, (SD NY, Oct. 23, 2013), is a criminal prosecution against Kahlid Al Fawwaz and Adel Abdel Bary for, among other things, conspiring with Osama Bin Laden to kill Americans abroad in embassy bombings in African countries.  Bary challenged language in his indictment that says al Qaeda regarded the United States as an infidel because the U.S. is "not governed in a manner consistent with the group's extremist interpretation of Islam." Defendant argued that this language in the indictment violates the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause:

[u]nder the First Amendment of the Constitution, the Government does not have the right to decide what forms of religion are "normal" versus "extreme." . . . . The Government's labeling of the defendant's belief in Islam as "extremist" is disapproving of and infringes on Mr. Abdel Bary's religious freedoms.

The court rejected this argument as "unpersuasive."

Britain's Prince George Baptized

In London yesterday, Prince George, third in line to the British throne, was christened in a ceremony attended by 22 invited guests.  As reported by CNN and People, the baptism into the Church of England took place in Chapel Royal at St James Palace.  The 3-month old baby was baptized by Most Rev. Justin Welby, the Archbishop of Canterbury, with water from the Jordan River using a silver font that has been used for every royal christening since 1841. The prince has 7 godparents.

6th Circuit Denies Small Business Challenge To Contraceptive Mandate

In Eden Foods, Inc. v. Sebelius, (6th Cir., Oct. 24, 2013), the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals denied a preliminary injunction to a for-profit natural foods corporation and its Catholic owners who claim that the contraceptive coverage mandate under the Affordable Care Act violates their free exercise rights as protected by the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.  The court held that circuit's prior decision in Autocam Corp. v. Sebelius (see prior posting) creates binding precedent for the circuit. In that case the court held that the coverage mandate's burden falls on the corporation, and that the business' owners lack standing to assert free exercise claims on behalf of the corporation.  Insofar as a claim by the corporation itself, the court in Autocam concluded that a for-profit corporation is not a person capable of religious exercise under RFRA. MLive reports on the decision.

Convictions Reversed After Prosecutor's Comments on Shariah Law

In Sate of Oregon v. Farokhrany, (OR App., Oct. 23, 2013), the Oregon Court of Appeals held that the trial court should have given a curative instruction after comments by the prosecutor in the trial of an Iranian Muslim defendant charged with use of cocaine with two high schoolers and the sexual groping of one of them.  As described by the court:

During voir dire, the prosecutor engaged potential jurors in a discussion about their views regarding the prosecution calling only one witness to prove a fact. The prosecutor contrasted for the potential jurors a scenario that he asserted "was out of either Iran or Saudi Arabia" where an alleged rape victim was required to produce five male witnesses to prove the rape. One juror purported to correct the prosecutor, stating that the prosecutor was describing Sharia law, a religious law, not the legal system of a country.

Explaining its reversal of defendant's convictions, the appeals court said:

because one likely effect of the prosecutor's comments was to suggest to jurors that men from countries that follow Sharia law feel free to commit sexual offenses as long as the necessary number of male witnesses are not present, it was incumbent on the trial court to neutralize the likely effect of the prosecutor's comments and remind the jurors that appeals to social, ethnic, or religious bias could not substitute for reason and evidence.

Blogtown reports on the decision.

Devotionals For President Obama By the Former White House Faith Based Office Head Criticized

The publication this week of Joshua Dubois, The President's Devotional, has created something of a controversy.  Dubois is former head of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, and the book is a compilation of 365 of the short Daily Devotionals (each including a Bible passage and prayer) that Dubois sent to President Obama each morning. Obama has said he found the devotional messages meaningful. Time Magazine this week says:

Sending the president a daily Christian reflection is not part of the White House Faith-Based director’s job description, and the devotional is already receiving pushback. “It seems quite inappropriate for the faith-based director to be composing prayers and Bible lessons on the government dime,” Maggie Garrett, legislative director for Americans United, says. “And it is especially true when there was really important work to be done, such as reforming the faith-based initiative rules.”

But spirituality is big business in America, and that type of criticism does not concern Dubois. He says he had the idea for the book about six months before he left the White House, but the actual compiling started after he left. He explains that while he did spend about an hour to an hour and a half every day writing the emails while he worked in the White House, he always did so on his own time. “I definitely did it before work or on the weekends and stuff like that,” he explains, clarifying that he usually sent them from his personal and not White House email address.

Reporting Not Required For Information On Abuse Learned By Priest During Confession

In Parents of Minor Child v. Charlet, (LA App., Oct. 21, 2013), a Louisiana appellate court held that a Catholic priest is not required to report information to authorities regarding the sexual abuse of a minor that the priest learned through confession in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. Nor is there a cause of action against a priest for negligent advice given during the Sacrament. The court held further that there is no private right of action against a mandatory reporter for failure to report child sexual abuse.  The reporting statute is enforceable only through criminal prosecution.  Justice Kuhn filed a separate concurring opinion.

Oklahoma Indian Tribe Issuing Marriage Licenses To Same-Sex Couples Where One Is Tribal Member

While Oklahoma's state constitution bars same-sex marriage, according to yesterday's Tulsa World the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes have issued marriage licenses to three same-sex couples in the last year.  Indian tribes are not subject to state law, and the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribal Code does not mention gender in its provisions for issuing marriage licenses.  A license can be issued, however, only if at least one of the partners is a tribal member.

New Shariah Penal Code Coming Into Effect In Brunei

AFP reports that yesterday the Sultan of Brunei announced that a new Shariah Penal Code will come into force in stages beginning next April. Brunei already has a dual set of courts, with Shariah courts handling primarily marital and inheritance issues. The new Penal Code, which only applies to Muslims in the country (70% of the population),  will, according to one expert, likely be applied "very, very softly," even though it includes death by stoning as the punishment for adultery.

Washington High Court Hears Arguments On Whether State Law Requires Religious Accommodation

The Washington state Supreme Court yesterday heard oral arguments (summary and video of full arguments) in Kumar v. Gate Gourmet, Inc. At issue is whether the Washington Law Against Discrimination requires employers to accommodate employees' religious practices. The suit was brought by four employees of a company that prepares meals for airline passengers. Plaintiffs, including a Hindu, Muslim and Orthodox Christian, claim that the lunch options served to them violate their religious beliefs because the company sometimes puts meat products in the vegetarian dish or pork in the meat dish offered to workers.  Employees for security reasons cannot bring their own lunches or go off-site for food.

Southern Baptists Pull Back From Political Fray

Today's Wall Street Journal carries a front-page feature story on Russell Moore who earlier this year took over leadership and changed the emphasis of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention. According to the Journal:

[A]fter more than three decades of activism, many in the religious right are stepping back from the front lines. Mr. Moore, a 42-year-old political independent and theologian ... says it is time to tone down the rhetoric and pull back from the political fray, given what he calls a "visceral recoil" among younger evangelicals to the culture wars.

 "We are involved in the political process, but we must always be wary of being co-opted by it," Mr. Moore said....

Church Seeks Supreme Court Review of Town's Sign Ordinance

A petition for certiorari (full text) was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday in Reed v. Town of Gilbert.  In the case, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 decision, upheld an Arizona town's sign ordinance that limits the size, number and time frame in which non-profit groups can display temporary directional signs.  The ordinance was challenged by a church that placed 17 signs in the area around its place of worship announcing the time and location of its services.(See prior posting.)  An ADF press release announced the filing of the petition for review.

British Tribunal Requires Conscience Exemption From Online VAT Filing

In Blackburn v. Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs, (UKFTT, Oct. 2, 2013), Britain's first Tier Tribunal ruled that British tax authorities should have granted an exemption from the requirement to make VAT filings online to a Seventh Day Adventist Couple who operated a beekeeping business. They must be allowed to file a paper return instead. Graham and Abigail Blackburn do not use computers, the Internet, TV or mobile phones because of their personal religious beliefs that these devices seduce people away from righteousness, even though the Seventh Day Adventist Church does not ban their use.  The Tribunal judge concluded that the requirement in Sec. 3 of the Human Rights Act requiring legislation to be read in a way that is compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights requires the grant of an exemption.  Failure to do so would infringe the Blackburns' right under Sec. 9(1) of the ECHR to freely manifest their religion or beliefs. BBC News reported on the decision yesterday.