Religion Clause

Tuesday, May 20, 2014

Oregon's Same-Sex Marriage Ban Is Invalidated

In Geiger v. Kitzhaber, (D OR, May 19, 2014), an Oregon federal district court held that Oregon's constitutional and statutory provisions that limit civil marriage to "one man and one woman" discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation in violation of the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause. Judge McShane concluded his opinion with these observations:

I am aware that a large number of Oregonians, perhaps even a majority, have religious or moral objections to expanding the definition of civil marriage.... Generations of Americans, my own included, were raised in a world in which homosexuality was believed to be a moral perversion, a mental disorder, or a mortal sin. I remember that one of the more popular playground games of my childhood was called "smear the queer" and it was played with great zeal and without a moment's thought to today' s political correctness. On a darker level, that same worldview led to an environment of cruelty, violence, and self-loathing.... Even today I am reminded of the legacy that we have bequeathed today' s generation when my son looks dismissively at the sweater I bought him for Christmas and, with a roll of his eyes, says "dad ... that is so gay."

.... It is at times difficult to see past the shrillness of the debate. Accusations of religious bigotry and banners reading "God Hates Fags" make for a messy democracy and, at times, test the First Amendment resolve of both sides. At the core of the Equal Protection Clause, however, there exists a foundational belief that certain rights should be shielded from the barking crowds; that certain rights are subject to ownership by all and not the stake hold of popular trend or shifting majorities.

.... With discernment we see not shadows lurking in closets or the stereotypes of what was once believed; rather, we see families committed to the common purpose of love, devotion, and service to the greater community.

.... I know that many suggest we are going down a slippery slope that will have no moral boundaries. To those who truly harbor such fears, I can only say this: Let us look less to the sky to see what might fall; rather, let us look to each other ... and rise.

ACLU of Oregon issued a press release announcing the decision. According to the Los Angeles Times, marriage licenses were issued to same-sex couples in Multnomah County, home to Portland, as soon as the decision was handed down. In February, the state attorney general said she would not defend the ban in court.

Monday, May 19, 2014

Minor Historical Error In Kagan's Town of Greece Dissent Has Been Corrected

Yair Rosenberg writing today at Tablet Magazine notes that the previously reported minor error in American religious history that had crept into Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan's dissent in the Town of Greece case earlier this month has now been corrected. The version of the opinion now on the Supreme Court's website correctly refers to Newport, Rhode Island as "one of the first communities of American Jews" rather than as "the first".

DC Transit System Carries Competing Controversial Ads Sparked By Middle East Rivalries

The Washington Post reported last week on the latest round of competing advertising on the sides of Washington, DC's Metro buses. In mid-March to mid-April, the Illinois-based group American Muslims for Palestine bought advertising space on the sides of 20 buses for an a banner ad featuring a drawing of Uncle Sam waving an Israeli flag, and reading: "We're Sweating April 15 So Israelis Don't Have To! Stop US Aid To Israel's Occupation!" In response to those ads which it described as "Jew-hating," the pro-Israel American Freedom Defense Initiative has purchased a month's worth of ads on the side of 20 buses beginning last Monday. Those ads feature a photo of Adolph Hitler with the mufti of Jerusalem who supported him, and read: "Islamic Jew-Hatred: It's In The Quran.Two-Thirds Of All US Aid Goes To Islamic Countries. Stop Racism. End All Aid To Islamic Countries."

Sunday, May 18, 2014

Utah Supreme Court Stays Orders On Birth Certificates For Adoptees of Same-Sex Parents

According to AP and a release from the Utah Attorney General's Office, the Utah Supreme Court on Friday night issued a stay of several state trial judges' orders that required the Utah Department of Health to issue birth certificates in same-sex parent adoptions. The stay came in response to a Petition for Emergency Relief filed by the Attorney General's office seeking clarification as to whether the trial court orders violate other provisions of Utah law that prohibit the state from recognizing same-sex marriages. Those provisions remain in effect while federal constitutional challenge to the ban on same-sex marriage is being appealed. (See prior posting.) Friday's state Supreme Court stay remains in effect until the issue of recognizing same-sex parent adoptions is resolved by the state Supreme Court.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Malipurathu v. Johnson, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64891 (ND OK, May 12, 2014), an Oklahoma federal district court permitted a Sikh inmate to proceed with his complaint that he was denied a Halal diet unless he changed his religious choice to Islam, and that he was not consistently being served halal meals that met his religious requirements even though he was put on a halal diet.

In Rodriguez v. Hubbard, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65165 (ED CA, May 9, 2014), a California federal magistrate judge recommended allowing a Native American inmate who was recognized as a sacred "pipe holder" to move ahead with his 1st, 8th and 14th Amendment claims growing out of the confiscation of religious items, an attack on him by other Native American inmates for not safeguarding the sacred pipe, and other infringements on his religious practices.

In Patterson v. Cate, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65182 (ED CA, May 8, 2014), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed with leave to amend a Mulim inmate's complaint that he was not receiving three Halal meal per day.

In Maier v. Pall, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65270 (MD PA, May 13, 2014), a Pennsylvania federal district court dismissed the complaint of an Odinist inmate who was refused an exemption from the grooming policy as to hair and beard length, and was not allowed to possess runestones and a Thor's hammer or observe holy days outside.

In Aron v. Green, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65287 (ND TX, May 12, 2014), a Texas federal district court dismissed a Muslim inmate's complaint that a corrections officer told him that he should not be a Muslim, and that destruction of his personal property and other harassment was retaliation because of his religion.

In Hayes v. Boone, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66420 (ED VA, May 14, 2014), a Virginia federal district court dismissed an inmate's complaint that his Common Fare religious diet was suspended temporarily when the prison experienced an influx of inmates from elsewhere evacuated because of Hurricane Irene.

Saturday, May 17, 2014

4th Circuit Vacates and Remands Challenge To Elementary School Graduation In Christian Chapel

In American Humanist Association v. Greenville County School District, (4th Cir., May 16, 2014), the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the district court's denial of a preliminary injunction in a suit challenging the holding of graduation ceremonies for a South Carolina elementary school at the chapel of a Christian college and including prayer as part of the official graduation ceremony. In his ruling from the bench, the district court judge had said that plaintiffs "were making a mountain out of a mole hill." (See prior posting.) The 4th Circuit concluded:

In denying Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, the district court provided no analysis of the law and made no attempt to apply the four factors [to be considered in granting a preliminary injunction] ... to the facts as alleged in the complaint. Thus, we are constrained to remand the case for reconsideration of the issue.

The 4th Circuit similarly vacated and remanded the district court's denial of plaintiffs' unopposed motion to proceed using pseudonyms. The court also agreed with plaintiffs that on remand the case should be reassigned to a different district court judge. AP reports on the decision.

Friday, May 16, 2014

Man Accused of Blasphemy In Pakistan Killed While In Police Custody

In Pakistan today, a 65-year old man who had been accused of blasphemy was shot dead by a teenager. According to Reuters:

Victim Khalil Ahmad was a member of the minority Ahmadi community, a sect who say they are Muslim but whose religion is rejected by the Pakistani state.

Ahmad and three other Ahmadis had asked a shopkeeper in their village in central Pakistan earlier this week to remove inflammatory stickers denouncing their community.... In retaliation, the shopkeeper filed blasphemy charges against the four men on May 12. Ahmad, a father of four, was in police custody when the teenage boy walked in, asked to see him, and shot him dead....

Some mullahs in Pakistan encourage the killing of Ahmadis.

Concerns Over Religious Tolerance In India Raised As BJP's Modi Is Elected Prime Minister

Reuters this morning reports that in India, markets are soaring as Narendra Modi's pro-Hindu Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) appears to have won a landslide Parliamentary majority. Modi has been Chief Minister of Gujarat state since 2001. Writing at CNN, journalist Sunny Hundal however raises the question of whether Modi as prime minister will threaten India's liberal secular tradition. He writes in part:

Established as a secular and liberal nation in 1950, India will find itself in uncharted territory as it has never before had a hardline Hindu nationalist at the helm.

This raises an important question: what will Modi the prime minister be like? Will he sweep away the corruption scandals blighting the country's reputation and do a better job of rejuvenating India, or will he inflame religious tensions as some fear?

Much of the criticism aimed at Modi has focused on the riots of 2002 when hundreds, possibly thousands, of Muslims were butchered by Hindu mobs, while his government was accused of standing by and watching. But if a Prime Minister Modi carries on like he did as Chief Minister of Gujarat state and as the candidate for the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) during campaigning, there are plenty of reasons to be worried about the future. The future Modi is a terrifying prospect if he is based on the past Modi.

9th Circuit Temporarily Stays Injunction That Allowed Same-Sex Marriage In Idaho

In Latta v. Otter, (9th Cir., May 15, 2014), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals granted a temporary stay of a federal district court's order that struck down Idaho's statutory and constitutional same-sex marriage ban. (See prior posting.) The temporary stay will be in place while the 9th Circuit decides whether to grant state and local officials' emergency motion (full text) for a longer stay pending appeal. Idaho Statesman reports on the 9th Circuit's order.

Understanding The Procedural Tangle In The Arkansas Same-Sex Marriage Challenge

As lower courts strike down same-sex marriage bans in various states, and state officials scramble to stay the orders and file appeals, the procedural tangles sometimes become difficult to penetrate. So here is an attempt to clarify where things stand procedurally in one state-- Arkansas.

On May 9, an Arkansas state trial court (the Pulaski County Circuit Court which includes the city of Little Rock) held that the state's constitutional and legislative bans on same-sex marriage violate the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause. (See prior posting.) A number of state and county officials filed an appeal with the Arkansas Supreme Court seeking an emergency stay of the trial court's order. In Smith v. Wright, (AR Sup. Ct., May 14, 2014), the Arkansas Supreme Court dismissed the appeal without prejudice on the ground that the trial court's order was not a final adjudication of all the claims of the parties and so could not yet be appealed. However it also held that reading the trial court's order carefully, the trial court had not issued a ruling as to Ark. Code Ann. § 9-11-208(b), prohibiting circuit and county clerks from issuing same-sex marriage licenses. So, according to the Supreme Court, that prohibition was still in effect.

The next day, May 15, the Pulaski County Circuit Court responded by issuing three separate orders: (1) it denied a stay of its earlier ruling (full text of order); (2) the Court issued a final order permanently enjoining both the bans on same-sex marriage and the provision prohibiting circuit and county clerks from issuing licenses to same sex couples (full text of order); and (3) the court issued an order making its May 15 ruling that covered the ban on issuing marriage licenses retroactive to May 9 by an order entering the ruling nunc pro tunc. It said that the original omission of a reference to the section on issuance of licenses was an inadvertent clerical error. (Full text of ruling.) Lyle Denniston at Scotus Blog suggests that the nunc pro tunc order serves to protect those clerks who issued licenses between May 9 and 15.

According to AP, the Pulaski County clerk resumed issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples shortly after the trial court's new orders. Other counties though are awaiting legal advice. And after same-sex marriages resumed in Pulaski County, the Arkansas attorney general's office returned to the state Supreme Court and again asked for a stay of the trial court's order, pending appeal. [Thanks to Tom Rutledge for the lead.]

Sudanese Woman Sentenced To Flogging and Death For Apostasy and Supposed Adultery

CNN reports that in Khartoum, Sudan this week, a court has sentenced 27-year old Meriam Yehya Ibrahim to death by hanging for apostasy and to 100 lashes for adultery after she refused to recant her Christian faith. Ibrahim was born to a Sudanese Muslim father and an Ethiopian Orthodox mother. Her father left when she was 6 years old and she was raised by her mother as a Christian. She married, has a 20-month old son and is 8 months pregnant with their second child. However because her father was Muslim, under Sudanese personal status law (based on Sharia) Ibrahim is still considered Muslim, and her marriage to a non-Muslim man is considered void-- hence the adultery charge. Ibrahim is in custody with her 20-month old son. The verdict can be appealed. Amnesty International has strongly protested the sentence.

Thursday, May 15, 2014

Court Says Catholic Health System's Pension Plans Qualify As "Church Plans" Under ERISA

In Overall v. Ascension, (ED MI, May 9, 2014), a Michigan federal district court-held that the pension plans of Ascension Health Alliance are "church plans" under ERISA, even though the plans were not "established by" a church. Disagreeing with two other recent decisions from other districts (1, 2), the court held that it is sufficient that Ascension Health Alliance is controlled by and associated with the Roman Catholic Church. The court dismissed for lack of standing plaintiff's claim that permitting organizations associated with a church to claim church plan status would violate the Establishment Clause. Fiduciary Matters Blog discusses the decision.

North Carolina Supreme Court Stays Trial Court's Injunction Against School Voucher Program

The North Carolina Supreme Court yesterday issued an order (full text) in Hart v. State of North Carolina, granting a stay of a trial court's temporary injunction that had barred implementation of the state's Opportunity Scholarship program. (See prior posting.) The program, enacted in 2013, gives up to 2400 students from low-income families scholarships of $4200 to attend a private or religious school of the parents' choice. WRAL News reports that the North Carolina Educational Assistance Authority will now likely move ahead with its planned lottery to determine which of the 5500 applicants will receive scholarships for next year. Two separate lawsuits have been filed against the program, arguing that it unconstitutionally spends taxpayer funds on private schools, including ones that discriminate in admissions. Parents for Educational Freedom in North Carolina issued a press release welcoming the Supreme Court's action.

Rabbi, 3 Others, Indicted For Diverting Grant Funds To Religious Schools and Camps

The Queens County, New York district attorney's office announced Tuesday that four men, including Rabbi Samuel Hiller, have been indicted on grand larceny charges for diverting over a 7-year period some $12.4 million in state and city funds meant for special needs students ages 3-5 served by Island Children's Development Center. Approximately $8 million of the funds were diverted by Rabbi Hiller to religious schools and camps, including $3 million to the girl's school at which Rabbi Hiller serves as principal. A civil forfeiture action has also been filed.

Wednesday, May 14, 2014

New York's Top Court Vacates Some of the Convictions In Dead Sea Scrolls Controversy

In People v. Golb, (NY Ct. App., May 13, 2014), New York's Court of Appeals (its highest appellate court) dismissed some, but not all, of the convictions growing out of a dispute over the origins of the Dead Sea Scrolls. As explained by the court:

Norman Golb, defendant's father, is a professor at the University of Chicago, and a scholar on the subject of the Scrolls. There is disagreement among scholars and experts about who wrote the Scrolls. One view, known as the Qumran-Sectarian theory, or Sectarian theory, is that the Scrolls were writings of a Jewish sect, living in or near Qumran. Norman Golb and others disagree.... They believe that the Scrolls were writings of various groups and that the writings were rescued from libraries in Jerusalem and brought to the caves for safekeeping at the time of the siege and sacking of the city by Roman troops in 70 C.E. (the Jerusalem libraries theory).

Defendant Raphael Golb, Professor Norman Golb's son, decided to defend his father's academic views through an Internet campaign attacking the integrity and reputation of academics and scholars who disagreed with his father's theory. According to the court, to accomplish this:

defendant, using pseudonyms and impersonating real academics and scholars, sent emails to museum administrators, academics and reporters. He published anonymous blogs. He concocted an elaborate scheme in which he used a pseudonym to engage one professor in an email exchange, and then impersonated a different scholar to criticize that professor's emails. Defendant impersonated a New York University (NYU) professor and sent emails to NYU students and NYU deans indicating that the professor had plagiarized the work of Professor Golb.

The court affirmed most of the criminal impersonation convictions of defendant, but vacated the convictions based on the mere creation of false e-mail accounts that were never used. The court vacated defendant's convictions for aggravated harassment, finding that Penal Law § 240.30(1) is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. The court upheld defendant's convictions for forgery, but vacated his convictions for unauthorized use of a computer and identity theft.

Chief Judge Lippman dissented in part, arguing that the entire indictment should be dismissed. Capital New York reports on the decision.

Court Says ACA Contraceptive Coverage Rules For Religious Non-Profits Do Not Violate RFRA

In Diocese of Cheyenne v. Sebelius, (D WY, My 13, 2014), a Wyoming federal district court denied a preliminary injunction in a challenge to the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage mandate rules for religious non-profits. Wyoming Catholic schools and charitable groups object to the opt out self-certification form that results in the third-party administrator of their self-insurance plans furnishing contraceptive coverage directly to the non-profits' employees. The court concluded that this does not impose a substantial burden on plaintiffs' religious exercise:

It is not Plaintiffs' self-certification that authorizes or obligates the TPA to ensure the objectionable contraceptive coverage; it is the ACA that does so.... Consequently, Plaintiffs' argument that completing the self-certification form requires them to enable access to objectionable contraceptive products and services is inaccurate and unconvincing....

While Plaintiffs hold very strong religious views that the TPA should not provide (or be forced by federal law to provide) contraceptive coverage, the TPA's provision of such coverage cannot be said to be a substantial burden on Plaintiffs'religious exercise....

Through the ACA's accommodation, Plaintiffs have the right to be exempted from participating in, providing, or paying for the costs associated with the objectionable contraceptive coverage based on their sincere religious beliefs, but they have no right to prevent a third party (who does not hold those same religious objections) from meeting the ACA's requirements.

AP reports on the decision. (See prior related posting.)

Korean Court Says It Cannot Review Church Disciplinary Actions

Inside Korea reports that last Friday, a Korean appellate court held that civil courts cannot review church disciplinary actions. The Seoul High Court dismissed a suit by a former priest, identified only as Kim, who was suspended in 2005 after allegedly embezzling funds of the Samsungsan Cathedral. He was defrocked after he filed civil suits against the Cathedral in protest of his suspension. The court said in part:

Our Constitution guarantees the freedom of religion and strictly separates the church and state. The freedom of managing and organizing religious councils must be provided for to the utmost.

Separately Kim is facing criminal charges over misappropriation of $74,000 in Cathedral funds.

More Same-Sex Marriage Developments-- 4th Circuit Oral Arguments; Idaho's Laws Invalidated By District Court

The U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday heard oral arguments (audio of arguments) in Bostic v. Schaefer. In the case, a Virginia federal district court held that Virginia's constitutional and statutory provisions barring same-sex marriage and prohibiting recognition of lawful same-sex marriages performed elsewhere are unconstitutional. (See prior posting.) Reporting on the oral arguments, the Washington Post said: "The sharply opposing viewpoints of two of the jurists suggested that the third, independent-minded Circuit Judge Henry F. Floyd, might hold the deciding vote."

Also yesterday, an Idaho federal magistrate judge struck down Idaho's statutory and constitutional provisions barring same-sex couples from marrying in the state or having their marriages performed elsewhere recognized in Idaho. In Latta v. Otter, (D ID, May 13, 2014), the court concluded that Idaho's marriage laws violate same-sex couples' rights under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the 14th Amendment. The court issued a permanent injunction, effective May 16. Idaho Statesman reports on the decision and on Idaho Governor Butch Otter's written statement after the decision saying that he will continue to defend the will of the people to limit marriage to the union of a man and a woman. UPDATE: AP reports that on May 14 the magistrate judge refused to stay her order pending appeal, writing that the appeal is unlikely to succeed.

School District Enters Consent Decree With Fellowship of Christian Athletes

Liberty Counsel announced yesterday that the Lake County, Florida, School Board has voted unanimously to enter into a Consent Decree in a suit brought against them last month by the Fellowship of Christian Athletes (FCA). Mount Dora High School allowed secular non-curricular student clubs access to school facilities for announcing their activities, included the club in the school yearbook and allowed club members to wear a colored cord at graduation to signify membership. FCA sued to obtain the same rights for religious non-curricular student clubs. The consent decree (full text) in Mount Dora High School Fellowship of Christian Athletes v. Lake County School Board, (MD FL), provides:

The District is hereby permanently enjoined from denying to the FCA Club, and any other high school religious non-curricular student club, Club Benefits that the District provides to any other high school non-religious, non-curricular student club, and from enforcing its Policy in a manner that violates the Equal Access Act or the First Amendment, consistent with current, applicable law.

The consent decree still must be approved by the court.