Court Says Priest-Penitent Privilege From Reporting Child Abuse May Be Unconstitutional

Delaware Code, Title 16, Chap. 9 requires reporting of suspected child abuse or neglect to authorities. Under Sec. 909, the only privileges that excuse reporting are the attorney-client privilege and the privilege "between priest and penitent in a sacramental confession."  State of Delaware v. Laurel Delaware Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses, (DE Super., Jan. 26, 2016), is an enforcement action against elders of a Jehovah's Witness congregation who did not report a sexual relationship between a 14-year old boy and an adult female member of the congregation.  Defendants' motion to dismiss raised the question of whether this priest-penitent privilege applies to these elders. The court held that if the privilege language is read narrowly, it is unconstitutional because it creates an exception only for certain religious denominations.  Even if read more broadly to cover similar kinds of conversations with clergy, here the conversations with elders were for the purpose of seeking spiritual advice and counsel, and were likely not for the purpose of penitence. Reveal reports on the decision.

Survey On Religion and Sports Shows 73% Favor Coaches Leading Players In Christian Prayer

The Public Religion Research Institute last week released its fourth annual survey of sports and religion.  The survey (full data) concluded that 48% of those surveyed think that playing fantasy online sports is gambling, while 63% think that gambling is morally acceptable.  Another question asked whether or not respondents agree that football coaches at public high schools should be allowed to lead their players in Christian prayer during games.  44% said they completely agree that this should be allowed, while 29% said they mostly agree; 14% completely disagree and 10% mostly disagree.

D.C. Circuit Revives Holocaust Survivors' Expropriation Claims Against Hungary

In Simon v. Republic of Hungary, (DC Cir., Jan. 29, 2015), the C.C. Circuit Court of Appeals allowed 14 Holocaust survivors to move ahead with claims against Hungary and the Hungarian state-owned railroad for property taken by the Nazis during World War II. The court summarized its decision as follows:

The wartime wrongs inflicted upon Hungarian Jews by the Hungarian government are unspeakable and undeniable. The issue raised by this appeal is whether those wrongs are actionable in United States courts.... The district court dismissed the suit, holding that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act’s treaty exception grants the Hungarian defendants immunity. The court concluded that the 1947 Peace Treaty between the Allied Powers and Hungary set forth an exclusive mechanism for Hungarian Holocaust victims to obtain recovery....

We hold that the peace treaty poses no bar to the plaintiffs’ lawsuit. While the treaty secures an obligation by Hungary to provide compensation for property interests confiscated from Hungarian Jews during the War, that obligation is not exclusive of other, extra-treaty means of recovery.... As a result, the FSIA’s treaty exception does not preclude this action.

Plaintiffs, however, still must overcome the FSIA’s default grant of immunity to foreign sovereigns. We hold that the FSIA’s expropriation exception affords plaintiffs a pathway to pursue certain of their claims: those involving the taking of the plaintiffs’ property in the commission of genocide against Hungarian Jews.... We further hold that the plaintiffs’ claims do not constitute nonjusticiable political questions.... We leave for the district court to consider on remand whether, as a matter of international comity, the plaintiffs must first exhaust available remedies in Hungary before proceeding with their claims in United States courts.

Law.com reports on the decision.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Imen Gallala-Arndt, The Impact of Religion in Interreligious Custody Disputes: Middle Eastern and Southeast Asian Approaches, (American Journal of Comparative Law, Vol. 63, No. 4, pp. 829-858, 2015).
• Barbara P. Billauer, The First Amendment, Moral Law and Abortion: The Conflict between Fetal Rights & Freedom of Religion, (January 22, 2016).
• Ross Campbell, Hobby Lobby as a Land Use Case: Charting For-Profit RLUIPA Claims, (NYU Journal of Law & Liberty, Vol. 10, No. 2, 2016).
• William P. Kratzke, The Biblical Fool and the Brander: The Law and Economics of Propertization in American Trademark Law, (Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal, 2016).
• Blair A. Major, Religion and Law in R v. NS: Finding Space to Re-Think the Balancing Analysis, (Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice, Vol. 32, No. 1, 2015).
• Anita Bernstein, Common Law Fundamentals of the Right to Abortion, (Buffalo Law Review Vol. 63, No. 1141 (2015)).
• Eric Heinze, Towards a Legal Concept of Hatred: Democracy, Ontology, and the Limits of Deconstruction, (Hate, Politics and Law (T. Brudholm & B. Johanssen, eds., Oxford University Press, 2016, Forthcoming)).
• Stuart Roth, The Politics of Turkey During the Holocaust, (1 J. Oxford Ctr. For Study of L. & Pub. Pol'y 87 (2015)).
• John George Archer, This SOX: Combating Public Charity Fraud with Sarbanes-Oxley, (January 20, 2016). 

From SSRN (Islamic Law):

• Mohamed A. Arafa & Jonathan G. Burns, Judicial Corporal Punishment in the United States? Lessons from Islamic Criminal Law for Curing the Ills of Mass Incarceration, (25 Indiana International & Comparative Law Review 3, 2015).
• Nadjma Yassari, Adding by Choice: Adoption and Functional Equivalents in Islamic and Middle Eastern Law, (American Journal of Comparative Law, Vol. 63, No. 4, pp. 927-962, 2015).
• Lena-Maria Möller, An Enduring Relic: Family Law Reform and the Inflexibility of Wilāya, (American Journal of Comparative Law, Vol. 63, No. 4, pp. 893-925, 2015).
• Nadjma Yassari, Lena-Maria Möller & Imen Gallala-Arndt, Introduction – Negotiating Parenthood in Muslim Countries: Changing Concepts and Perceptions, (American Journal of Comparative Law (AJCL), Vol. 63, No. 4, pp. 819-827, 2015).
• Yusuf Roque Santos Morales, Maslaha as a Guide and Basis for Governance of Society, ("3rd Bitiala sa Maguindanao" Series (conversations in Maguindanao) January 11, 2016).
• Muhammad Hasbi Zaenal & Abdul Ghafar Ismail, Slavery - A Mere 'Commodity' or a Human Dignity: Classical View and Solution, (January 13, 2016).
• Zahid Siddique, Liberal Development Strategies: An Islamic Perspective, (January 27, 2016).

Suit Over Chabad House In Historic District Survives Almost All Motions To Dismiss

Chabad Lubavitch of Litchfield County, Inc. v. Borough of Litchfield, Connecticut, (D CT, Jan. 27, 2016), a decision on remand from the 2nd Circuit, is the latest installment in the long-running attempt of the Hasidic Jewish organization, Chabad, to expand a building it purchased in Lichtfield, Connecticut's Historic District.  In a 61-page opinion in the suit filed under RLUIPA,  the court first examined whether all parts of the proposed expansion of the building into a Chabad House would be used for religious purposes. It concluded:

Construction of the proposed facilities is in large measure religious exercise and, as to the remaining use / facilities, there exist genuine issues of material fact regarding their status as places of religious exercise.

The court then moved to consider whether the Historic District Commission's denial of a Certificate of Appropriateness placed a substantial burden on Chabad’s religious exercise. It concluded that there are genuine issues of material fact as to whether or not it did, so that defendants' motion for summary judgment on this point was denied. The court also refused to dismiss plaintiffs' discrimination claim under RLUIPA, holding that there is sufficient evidence in the record for the fact finder to conclude that the Commission acted with an intent to discriminate on the basis of religion. The court went on to reject various defenses. Finally the court granted defendants' motion to dismiss the Chabad Rabbi as a plaintiff in the discrimination claim, but not as to the substantial burden claim.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Mauwee v. Olivas, (9th Cir., Jan. 27, 2016), the 9th Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a complaint by a Native American inmate that for five months he was deprived of deer antlers used for sweat lodge ceremonies.

In Terry v. Babcock, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6073 (CD CA, Jan. 19, 2016), a California federal district court dismissed with leave to amend a Jehovah's Witness inmate's complaint that he was forced to attend an educational class that violated his beliefs. Plaintiff had asserted that his religious beliefs preclude him from being "a part of any educational class/program which does not include worship, and the timeless teachings of the Creator."

In San Antonio v. Shipman, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8209 (ND FL, Jan. 25, 2016), a Florida federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175229, Dec. 18, 2015) and dismissed as moot an inmate's RLUIPA complaint over his removal from the faith-based dormitory. The court dismissed, with leave to amend, plaintiff's 1st Amendment claim.

In Tatum v. Meisner, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8642 (WD WI, Jan. 26, 2016), a Wisconsin federal district court allowed an inmate to move ahead with this claim under RLUIPA that authorities had denied his request for a diet that complies with Nation of Islam rules.

In Moseley v. Spencer, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10232 (D MA, Jan. 27, 2016), a Massachusetts federal district court ordered an inmate to file an amended complaint or else face dismissal of his complaint that he was forced to choose between his religious (kosher) diet and his medical diet involving an evening snack for diabetes. He also complained that he has not been provided proper food and other items to celebrate Passover.

Texas Supreme Court: Cheerleaders' Battle With School District Not Moot

In Matthews v. Kountze Independent School District, (TX Sup. Ct., Jan. 29. 2016), the Texas Supreme Court, without hearing or oral argument, held that a dispute between football cheerleaders and a local school system over run-through banners carrying religious messages is not moot.  Originally the school banned the religious verses, but after a trial court issued a temporary injunction allowing the cheerleaders to continue using the banners, the school reversed its ban and the court of appeals agreed with the school that this eliminated any live controversy. (See prior posting.) The Supreme Court reversed, saying in part:

the District’s voluntary abandonment here provides no assurance that the District will not prohibit the cheerleaders from displaying banners with religious signs or messages at school-sponsored events in the future.

Justice Willett filed a concurring opinion, invoking analogies from the movie The Lion King. Justice Guzman filed a concurring opinion emphasizing that school officials need guidance on the extent to which limits on religious speech are permissible. AP reports on the decision. [Thanks to Steven Jamar via Religionlaw for the lead.]

Tennessee Appeals Court Invokes Ecclesiastical Abstention In Church Property Dispute

In Church of God In Christ, Inc. v. L.M. Haley Ministries, Inc., (TN App, Jan. 27, 2016), a Tennessee state appeals court in a 2-1 decision held that the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine prevents civil courts from adjudicating a dispute between a local congregation and its parent body over ownership of assets-- including real property and a bank account with a balance of over $150,000.  Sometime after Gospel Center Temple's founding pastor died, the Jurisdictional Bishop for the Tennessee area of the Church of God In Christ ("COGIC"), David Hall, invoked a provision in COGIC's Official Manual that vacancies in the pastorate of local churches would be filled by the Jurisdictional Bishop until a new pastor was appointed. When Hall attempted to actively manage the local church and transfer its bank account into his name, some members of the local church threatened him and prevented him from getting access to the church's liquid assets. The local members also formed a new corporation to take title to the church's real estate, and voted to remove themselves from Bishop Hall's jurisdiction. However they remained member of COGIC. This led to a suit by COGIC. The majority rejected jurisdiction, saying that it could not adjudicate the real property dispute as long as the congregation had not withdrawn from the parent body.  And as to the dispute over the church's bank account, the majority said in part:

Bishop Hall's alleged authority regarding Gospel Center Church's personal property, including its bank accounts, derives from Bishop Hall's alleged place as the lawful leader of the church. This Court, however, has no subject matter jurisdiction to declare that Bishop Hall is the lawful leader of Gospel Center Church....

Judge Goldin filed a dissenting opinion.

Suit Seeks To Bring Marijuana Under American Indian Religious Freedom Act

Courthouse News Service reported this week that Oklevueha Native American Church leaders James "Flaming Eagle" Mooney and Joy Graves filed suit in an Oregon federal district court on January 15 against the federal government and the U.S. Postal Service.  The suit claims that federal authorities illegally seized 5 ounces of sacramental marijuana mailed to a church member in Ohio last December. Plaintiffs claim that their use of marijuana is protected by the American Indian Religious Freedom Act.  National leaders of the Native American Church do not recognize the Oklevueha branch, nor do they agree with its claims that marijuana (as opposed to peyote) has sacramental use.  In 2013, a Hawaii federal district court rejected a claim under RFRA by Mooney. (See prior posting.) That decision is on appeal.

Arkansas Board of Health Rejects Legislature's Description of Abortion

The Northwest Arkansas Democrat reports today that the Arkansas state Board of Health is setting up a confrontation with the state legislature.  The Board voted 12-6 (with 5 abstentions) to avoid using the phrase "death of the unborn child" in final regulations it is adopting, even though that language appears in statutes it is implementing.  The Board substituted the phrase "termination of the pregnancy" in the regulations that implement six abortion laws passed last year and parts of an older statute. The governor and the state Department of Health director expect the legislature to reject the new language in the rule review process that follows.

Atheists Can Move Ahead With Challenge To Florida County Ten Commandments Monument

In American Atheists, Inc. v. Levy County, Florida, (ND FL, Jan. 27, 2016), a Florida federal district court held that American Atheists and one of its members have standing to challenge on Establishment Clause grounds a Ten Commandments monument that was placed on the Levy County courthouse grounds. It also held that plaintiffs have standing to assert an Equal Protection challenge after their application to erect a monument of their own near the Ten Commandments monument was rejected.  The court concluded that plaintiffs complaint plausibly states both 1st and 14th amendment claims. Religion News Service reports on the case.

Court Refuses To Allow Amended Complaint On Building Code Application To Home Bible Study Groups

In Salman v. Phoenix, (D AZ, Jan. 27, 2016), an Arizona federal district court refused to permit an ordained minister who used his home for weekly Bible study meetings  and worship to file a third amended complaint seeking damages and injunctive relief against the city's application of its building code to his activities.

Suit Challenges High School History Unit On Islam

The parents of a high schooler filed suit in a Maryland federal district court this week alleging that a two-week unit on Islam in the La Plata High School 11th grade World History class unconstitutionally promoted Islam over Christianity and Judaism.  The complaint (full text) in Wood v. Charles County Public Schools, (D MD, filed 1/27/2016), contends that plaintiffs' daughter was removed from class and given failing grades on assignments when she refused to complete work sheets on Islam that would have caused her to deny and insult her Christian beliefs. The suit contends that this violated the 1st and 14th Amendments, federal civil rights laws and state constitutional provisions.  Thomas More Law Center issued a press release on the case.

Report Traces New Role of The Satanic Temple

San Jose, California's Metroactive carried an interesting article yesterday titled How Satan Became the New Face of Secularism.  It chronicles the emergence of the Satanic Temple as a player in the church-state debate:

Originally conceived as a "poison pill in the church-state debate," ... the temple has since evolved beyond reactive political ploys. "Our message and beliefs are deeply sincere," says Jex Blackmore, who leads the group's highest-profile chapter in Mesner's native Detroit. "To us, Satan is a figure that embodies the characteristics that inform our deeply held beliefs, rather than a stab at the superstitious."

Adherents ...  embrace an atheistic philosophy that views Satan not as a deity but a literary symbol. Satan, in this brand of "ism," stands for reason, autonomy and rejection of superstition and arbitrary authority.... 

In the spirit of Satan as eternal outcast, activism remains central to the group's mission. Where religion has already breached the church-state divide, the Satanic Temple elbows in to remind lawmakers that those privileges necessarily extend to other beliefs. 

African-American Church Files RLUIPA Suit Over Denial of Special Use Permit

A Johnston, Rhode Island predominately African-American congregation has filed a lawsuit against the town and its zoning official who denied the church a special use permit to allow it to use the church building it purchased last year for religious assembly. The complaint (full text) in King's Tabernacle v. Town of Johnston, Rhode Island, (D RI, filed 1/25/2016) contends that even though the building has been used for worship by other congregations since 1891, city officials required King's Tabernacle to apply for a special use permit, and then denied the application. The town's zoning official, who subsequently was recorded making racist remarks about the church, told the church it would now have to pay property taxes. The suit contends that the denial of the special use permit violated RLUIPA and the church's free exercise rights. Johnston Patch reports on the filing of the lawsuit.

Former Atheist Employee Can Move Ahead With Title VII Suit Against Christian Business

Mathis v. Christian Heating & Air Conditioning, Inc., (ED PA, Jan. 25, 2016) is a discrimination lawsuit brought under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights and and under the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act by an installation mechanic who was fired  or constructively discharged for covering the back of his identification badge with tape to hide his employer company's religious mission statement.  The company's owner is a born-again Christian, while plaintiff is an atheist.  The statement which plaintiff taped over read:

This company is not only a business, it is a ministry. It is set on standards that are higher than man’s own. Our goal is to run this company in a way most pleasing to the Lord.

Treating employees and customers as we would want to be treated along with running a business as if we are all part of one big family is our plan.

The court rejected defendant's RFRA defense, holding that RFRA applies only to suits in which the government is a party.  The court went on to hold that plaintiff had established a prima facie case of failure to accommodate his atheistic beliefs, saying:

Under Title VII, atheists are entitled to the exact same protection as members of other religions.... A reasonable trier of fact could infer from this evidence that Peppelman terminated plaintiff’s employment “with the motive of avoiding accommodation,” in violation of Title VII.

The court also held that plaintiff can move ahead with his retaliation claim.

4th Circuit Hears Oral Arguments On County Commissioners' Invocation Policy

The U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals today heard oral arguments (audio of full arguments) in Lund v. Rowan County, North Carolina, (Docket No. 15-1591). In the case, a North Carolina federal district court held that a county Board of Commissioners' invocation policy is not constitutionally permissible under the Supreme Court's Town of Greece decision when sectarian invocations are delivered by the county commissioners themselves rather than invited clergy and other prayer-givers. The district court also found the county's practice unconstitutionally coercive. (See prior posting.) WBTV reports on today's arguments.

Today Is International Holocaust Remembrance Day

Today is International Holocaust Remembrance Day, set by the United Nations on the anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau. Jerusalem Post reports:

In Washington, US President Barack Obama will attend a ceremony at the Israeli Embassy posthumously honoring four Righteous Among the Nations – non- Jews who risked their lives to save Jews during the Holocaust and are recognized by Israel's Yad Vashem....

Among those being honored is US Army master-sergeant Roddie Edmonds (died 1985), from Knoxville, Tennessee, who, when imprisoned in a German POW camp, refused to identify Jewish soldiers under his command, telling the camp commandant: “We are all Jews.”...

Chancellor Angela Merkel, in her podcast on Saturday, said anti-Semitism in Germany is “more widespread than we imagine,” citing schools, social media and legal measures.

She called on refugees to reject anti-Semitism.

On Monday, Merkel opened the biggest exhibition of Holocaust art outside Israel in Berlin.

UPDATE: Here is the full text of President Obama's remarks at the Righteous Among Nations Award Ceremony.

Iran's Rouhani Visits Italy; Religious Protocol Among Economic Talks

As reported by Al Jazeera, on Monday Iran's President Hassan Rouhani arrived in Italy to begin a four-day European trip that will also take him to France. The trip focuses mainly on renewing economic ties. International Business Times reports that some Italians are angered at their government's handling of Rouhani's tour of a famous Rome museum:

Rouhani toured the Musei Capitolini (Capitoline Museums) – which hosts a huge collection of artefacts from the ancient, medieval and renaissance periods – accompanied by Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi on 25 January.

However, the Iranian leader could not admire some of the museum's masterpieces, as all marbles depicting naked scenes had been carefully hid behind large white panels.

The vast censorship effort was reportedly implemented as a show of respect to the reformist president, out of fears that the exposed private parts of ancient Roman gods could offend Iranian sensitivity. Wine was also banned from official receptions.

VIS reports that Rouhani also met in the Vatican with Pope Francis:

During the cordial discussions, common spiritual values emerged and reference was made to the good state of relations between the Holy See and the Islamic Republic of Iran, the life of the Church in the country and the action of the Holy See to favour the promotion of the dignity of the human person and religious freedom.

Falwell Endorses Trump; Other Evangelical Leaders Quickly Object

Donald Trump's presidential campaign announced yesterday that Trump has received the endorsement of Jerry Falwell, Jr. who is president of Liberty University and is the son of the late televangelist Jerry Falwell, Sr.  In endorsing Trump, Falwell called him  "a successful executive and entrepreneur, a wonderful father and a man who I believe can lead our country to greatness again." According to the Washington Post, this is part of Trump's recent attempt to appeal to religious voters:

On the campaign trail in Iowa, he now begins rallies with a prayer. In Sioux City and Pella, the prayer was offered by Dallas megachurch pastor Robert Jeffress. And on Sunday, Trump attended a Presbyterian service where he met with churchgoers and posed for pictures.

Politico reports however:

Jerry Falwell Jr.’s endorsement of Donald Trump on Tuesday was swiftly met with a backlash from other Christian conservatives sounding the alarm about what they see as a dangerous candidate with questionable morals.

John Stemberger, president of the Florida Family Policy Council said: "The late Dr. Jerry Falwell Sr. would be rolling over in his grave if he knew the son who bore his name had endorsed the most immoral and ungodly man to ever run for President of the United States."