Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Shehee v. Ahlin, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22708 (ED CA, Feb. 24, 2016), a California federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing a suit by a Hindu civil detainee that he was denied his religious vegan diet.

In Perez v. Watts, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20497 (SD GA, Feb. 19, 2016), a Georgia federal district court adopted (as supplemented by the court) a magistrate's recommendation (2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173384, Dec. 31, 2015) and dismissed monetary damage claims brought by a Santeria inmate claiming interference with his ability to practice his religion. (See prior related posting.)

In Powell v. Morris, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20971 (D MS, Feb. 22, 2016), a Mississippi federal magistrate judge dismissed a Muslim inmate's complaint that he was not provided halal meals or Taleem study classes.

In Blalock v. Jacobsen, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21168 (SD NY, Feb. 22, 2016), a New York federal district court dismissed a Muslim inmate's complaint about limits on his ability to have has prison-issued pants shortened to comply with religious principles.

In Avery v. Elia, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21367 (ED CA, Feb. 19, 2016), a California federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing the complaint of a Wiccan inmate that he was not permitted to ceremonially burn wood in a fire pit.

In Cary v. Robinson, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20876 (WD MI, Feb. 22, 2016), a Michigan federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21810, Feb. 2, 2016)  and permitted a Native American inmate to move ahead with his free exercise and equal protection challenges to confiscation and desecration of his medicine bag.

In Johnson v. Brown, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20929 (ND AL, Feb. 22, 2016), an Alabama federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21916, Feb. 1, 2016) and dismissed a Muslim inmate's complaint regarding limitation of Sunnah inmates' access to the "Masjid" classroom and occasional interruption of religious services.

In Ramos v. Department of Corrections, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22311 (D CT, Feb. 24, 2016), a Connecticut federal district court allowed an inmate who is a member of the Santeria religion to move ahead with his complaint that his free exercise and equal protection rights were infringed when he was not allowed to possess tarot cards to practice his religion.

In Cruz v. Collins, 2016 Mass. App. Unpub. LEXIS 194 (MA App., Feb. 25, 2016), a Massachusetts state appeals court reversed a trial court's dismissal of a RLUIPA claim by a Nation of Islam inmate challenging limits on his access to  use classroom space to pray and study throughout the week.

In Hays v. Helder, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23093 (WD AR, Feb. 25, 2016), an Arkansas federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation and dismissed (partly on res judicata grounds) a complaint by a member of the Cherokee Indian faith that he was denied access to his medicine bag.

Title IX Religious Organization Exemption Does Not Bar Retaliation Claim Against Catholic High School

In Goodman v. Archbishop Curley High School, Inc., (D MD, Feb. 26, 2016), a Maryland federal district court refused to dismiss a former high school librarian's Title IX retaliation claim against the Catholic high school from which she was fired.  Librarian Annette Goodman reported to the school's administration evidence that another faculty member was having a sexual affair with one of the school's students. The school fired Goodman claiming that she delayed too long reporting her concerns to the school. Goodman says the firing was an attempt to deflect attention from the school's indifference to sexual abuse.  The court rejected the school's claim that Title IX's religious organizations exemption requires dismissal of Goodman's lawsuit, saying in part:

The position of the Defendants ... is that Title IX’s religious organizations exemption bars any employment discrimination or retaliation claim against them if they define their actions as tenets of their religion. There is a noticeable lack of case authority supporting such a broad application of the religious exemption.

The court also rejected defendants' claims that their rights under the First Amendment and RFRA would be violated by allowing the suit to move forward.

Church Fails In RLUIPA Challenge To Village's Zoning Ordinance

In Truth Foundation Ministries, NFP v. Village of Romeoville, (ND IL, Feb. 26, 2016), an Illinois federal district court denied a preliminary injunction to a small congregation serving mainly African immigrants that found itself in violation of the village's zoning code after it had spent over $50,000 expanding a building it was leasing for use as a church.  The court concluded that the church had failed to show a substantial likelihood of success in its claim that the town's zoning requirements violate RLUIPA's complete exclusion, unreasonable exclusion and equal terms provisions.

Trump Pledges To Work To Eliminate Ban on Religious Non-Profits Endorsing Candidates

In a news conference in Ft. Worth, Texas today, Republican candidate Donald Trump-- saying that Christians are afraid to have a lobby because it threatens their tax exempt status-- pledged to work to eliminate the Johnson amendment that prevents non-profits, including religious non-profits, from endorsing or opposing political candidates. (Video of news conference, this portion at 1:44).  This came after evangelical Pastor Robert Jeffress endorsed Trump at the news conference (video at 1:42).

Trump Speculates Audit of His Tax Returns Stems From Religious Discrimination

As reported by Politico, during last night's contentious CNN Republican presidential debate Donald Trump said that he has not released his tax returns because they are the subject of a routine IRS audit. Then in an interview with CNN's Chris Cuomo immediately following the debate, Trump said:

But the one problem I have is that I’m always audited by the IRS, which I think is very unfair. I don’t know, maybe because of religion, maybe because I’m doing something else, maybe because I’m doing this, although this is just recently.

Cuomo followed up asking Trump what he meant by religion, and Trump responded:

Well maybe because of the fact that I’m a strong Christian, and I feel strongly about it. And maybe there’s a bias.  You see what’s happened. I mean, you have many religious groups have been complaining about that. They’ve been complaining about it for a long time.

Data On Religious Affiliation of Super Tuesday Voters

The Pew Research Center yesterday compiled data in post titled A Closer Look At Religion in the Super Tuesday States.  It reports in part:

Overall, nearly half of all people in the 12 Super Tuesday states who identify as or lean toward the Republican Party (47%) are evangelical Protestants....

Massachusetts, one of the five states outside the South to vote Tuesday, is the biggest exception to this trend; only 10% of Massachusetts Republicans are evangelicals, while fully half (50%) are Catholics....

Among Democrats, people with no religious affiliation are the largest group in three of the 11 states that will vote Tuesday....

Members of historically black Protestant churches also are a key Democratic constituency.... 

Evangelicals are the single biggest group among Democrats in Tennessee (39%), and they make up 20% of all Democrats in the 11 states that will vote Tuesday.

In Massachusetts (27%) and Texas (26%), about a quarter of Democrats are Catholics; in Texas, the overwhelming majority of Catholic Democrats (79%) are Hispanic....

FFRF Sues Over Governor's Removal of Bill of Rights "Nativity" Display

As previously reported, last December Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, as chairman of the Texas State Preservation Board, forced the executive director of the Board to remove from the state capitol rotunda a previously-approved display by the Freedom From Religion Foundation of a Bill of Rights "nativity" scene.  The display included figures of the founding fathers and a sign about the Winter solstice. The Governor complained that the display mocks Christians and Christianity. Yesterday, FFRF filed a lawsuit challenging the governor's action and requesting a declaratory judgment, injunction and nominal damages. The complaint (full text) in Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Abbott,  (WD TX, filed 2/25/2016), contends:

Defendants have violated the Plaintiff’s Free Speech, Equal Protection and Due Process rights, and ... have violated the Establishment Clause, by removing and excluding the Plaintiff’s protected speech, a display, from a public forum, because of the content of the Plaintiff’s speech.

FFRF issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

Amicus Briefs Supporting Government In Zubik Case Are Filed

Feb. 17 was the deadline to file amicus briefs with the U.S. Supreme Court in support of the government's position in Zubik v. Burwell and its companion cases which challenge the accommodation for religious non-profits that object to the contraceptive coverage mandate under the Affordable Care Act.  21 amicus briefs were filed, and SCOTUSblog has links to most of them, as well as to the amicus briefs supporting petitioner which where due last month. (See prior posting.) Oral argument is set for March 23. With the death of Justice Scalia, the possibility of an evenly divided court is present.  That would affirm the Circuit Court decisions in all 7 of the cases in which review was granted.

Airline Faces Religious Objection To In-Flight Movie

According to Haaretz, Israel's El Al Airlines yesterday faced an unruly passenger demand for religious accommodation.  On a flight from Warsaw, Poland to Tel Aviv, an ultra-Orthodox Jewish passenger objected that the in-flight movie being shown was immodest.  He began pushing and striking at the screens showing it, breaking two of them. The movie was "Truth," an "R" rated film starring Cate Blanchett, Robert Redford and Dennis Quaid.  El Al has faced at least one prior incident of passengers objecting to the in-flight movies, and a number of times has faced religious demands by passengers for sex-segregated seating assignments. (See prior related posting.)

Feds Indict FLDS Leaders On Food Stamp Fraud Charges

The U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Utah announced on Tuesday the unsealing of an indictment against eleven leaders and members of the polygamous FLDS Church charging them with conspiracy to commit food stamp fraud and conspiracy to commit money laundering.  (Full text of indictment in United States v. Jeffs). According to the U.S. Attorney's Office:

The indictment alleges church leaders diverted SNAP proceeds from authorized beneficiaries to leaders of the FLDS Church for use by ineligible beneficiaries and for unapproved purposes. A large percentage of FLDS Church members living in the Hildale, Utah – Colorado City, Arizona, community known as Short Creek receive SNAP benefits, amounting to millions of dollars in benefits per year.

Essentially, FLDS leaders required food stamp recipients to donate their benefits to a central clearing house which then redistributed food and household items to all in the community, whether or not they were food-stamp eligible. The indictment includes counts seeking criminal forfeiture of assets.  Daily Beast  reports further on the indictments.

Housing Crunch For Orthodox Jews In New Jersey Places Focus On Real Estate Practices [UPDATED]

AP reported yesterday on the influx of ultra-Orthodox Jews into the town of Lakewood, New Jersey and surrounding communities.  AP reports that the influx is of Hasidic Jews, but as a commenter on Twitter to an earlier version of this post points out, the Jews in Lakewood, and the yeshiva that attracts them are largely in the Orthodox Lithuanian Jewish ("Yeshivish") tradition, not Hasidic. Nevertheless here is AP's report:

A housing crunch in Lakewood, home to one of the nation’s largest populations of Hasidic Jews, has triggered what residents of neighboring communities say are overly aggressive, all-hours solicitations from agents looking to find homes for the rapidly growing Jewish community.

The complaints have prompted towns, including Toms River, to update their “no-knock” rules and related laws, adding real estate inquiries to measures that already limit when soliciting can occur and allow residents to bar solicitations.

But Jewish leaders and others say the no-knock laws unfairly target Orthodox Jews and those seeking to help them find houses. Many current residents came to the community to study at one of the largest yeshivas in the world and eventually settled down....

On the other hand, some of the solicitation activity is reminiscent of the kind of activity that led to the federal Fair Housing Act's ban on "blockbusting."  42 USC Sec. 3604(e) makes it illegal:

For profit, to induce or attempt to induce any person to sell or rent any dwelling by representations regarding the entry or prospective entry into the neighborhood of a person or persons of a particular race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin.

AP describes one homeowner's experience:

James Jackson didn’t want to sell his home but thanked the black-suited man for his interest anyway.

That’s when the man put his hand on Jackson’s shoulder and told him he might want to reconsider. Many of his neighbors in the New Jersey shore town of Toms River, the man said, already planned to sell to Jewish buyers like those he represented.

“He asked me why I would want to live in a Hasidic neighborhood if I wasn’t Hasidic,” Jackson recalled. “He asked if I would really be happy, if it would be in my family’s best interests.”

Indiana City Strengthens LGBT Anti-Discrimination Protections

As reported by the Evansville Courier & Press, Evansville, Indiana city council on Monday, by a 7-2 vote, passed Ordinance G-2016-05 (full text) which expands anti-discrimination protections for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender individuals.  Previously the city banned discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, but the city's Human Relations Commission essentially lacked enforcement power. Investigation and mediation were solely voluntary on the part of the parties. The new ordinance gives the Human Relations Commission the same enforcement powers in cases of LGBT discrimination, as in discrimination on other bases. The new ordinance however also enacts new exemptions from the city's anti-discrimination provisions.  It exempts religious and religiously affiliated organizations, as well as private social clubs. City Council rejected proposed broader exemptions for individuals and non-profits with a "religious conscience."

Religious Beliefs of Presidential Candidates Continue To Be Focus of Interest

International Business Times yesterday reviewed the religious faiths of each of the remaining candidates in the Republican and Democratic races for President of the United States, saying:

Some of the candidates’ paths to faith are more complicated than others, as they either deepened or found their faith at different points in their lives. Here we take a look at how each candidate identifies religiously, as well as at the religions of their children, spouses and parents.

Candidates' religious beliefs continue to spark controversy and interest.  As reported by the Wall Street Journal, candidate Ted Cruz yesterday dismissed his communications director Rick Tyler who had been his chief spokesman after Tyler posted on social media a video that misquoted a remark by rival Marco Rubio.  The misquote suggested that Rubio did not think the Bible had many answers in it, when in fact Rubio had said just the opposite.

Meanwhile last week, The Forward published an interesting opinion piece by Rabbi Valerie Lieber titled We Need To Out Bernie Sanders As A Jew-- For His Own Good.

Advocacy Organization Launches New Name and Website

The religious freedom advocacy organization Liberty Institute announced last week that it has changed its name to First Liberty Institute. The change is intended to emphasize the organization's focus on religious liberty. It has also launched a newly designed website with a new URL. First Liberty has released its 2016 edition of Undeniable: The Survey of Hostility to Religion in America. (full text).

UC Irvine Rejects Endowed Chairs in Religious Studies Because of Donor Restrictions

The University of California Irvine is rejecting some $6 million in contributions to create four endowed chairs relating to the religions and history of India. Inside Higher Ed reports that an Ad Hoc Committee on Endowed Chairs in the School of Humanities has recommended against the chairs because the agreements establishing them "include language that is not consistent with University policies related to religious and academic freedom."  (Full text of committee's report).  The report recommends rejection, regardless of agreement modifications, of two chairs proposed by the Dharma Civilization Foundation (DCF)-- one a chair in Indic and Vedic Civilization Studies and a second in Modern India Studies-- because "DCF is unusually explicit and prescriptive on appropriate disciplinary formations, what constitutes good or acceptable scholarship, and, indeed, what constitutes good or acceptable scholars."  According to Inside Higher Ed, The Dharma Civilization Foundation is:

a California entity that seeks to fund the academic study and teaching of Indian religions as a corrective to what it describes as widespread misrepresentations of Hinduism by scholars who do not practice the religion.

The Committee also recommended that two other proposed chairs endowed by families-- one chair in Jain Studies and one in Sikh Studies-- be returned to the dean's office for further review.  The Dean of the School of Humanities accepted all the recommendations.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• George Mader, Binding Authority: Unamendability in the United States Constitution — A Textual and Historical Analysis, (Marquette Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Nathan S. Chapman, The Establishment Clause, State Action, and Town of Greece, (William & Mary Bill of Rights, Vol. 24, 2015).
• Adam Lamparello, Contextualizing the Free Exercise of Religion, (February 16, 2016).
• Harry G. Hutchison, Hobby Lobby, Corporate Law, and Unsustainable Liberalism: A Reply to Judge Strine, (Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, Vol. 39, 2016).
• Leo E. Strine, Criminal Justice and (a) Catholic Conscience, (Santa Clara Law Review, Vol. 56, 2016, Forthcoming).
• Michael W. McConnell & Luke W. Goodrich, On Resolving Church Property Disputes, (Arizona Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Annalee Hickman Moser, We Believe in Being Honest: Dependency Exemptions for LDS Missionaries, (December 1, 2015).
• Twana A. Hassan, A Historical Analysis of the Development of Free Speech Justifications, (The Journal Jurisprudence, Vol. 28 (2015), 487-506).

From SSRN (Non-U.S. and Comparative Law):

• Omar Salah & Christa Rautenbach, Islamic Finance: A Corollary to Legal Pluralism or Legal Diversity in South Africa and the Netherlands?, (Comparative and International Law of Southern Africa, Forthcoming).
• David M. Tanovich, J(TR): Time to Remove Religion From the Oath, ((2014) 6 Criminal Reports (7th) 211-214)).
• Shalu Nigam, The Privileges of Being a Hindu, Upper Caste and Elite Class, Male in India, (February 10, 2016).
• Francesco Duranti, The Constitutional Reform on State-Church Relationships, (Two Centuries of Norwegian Constitution: Between Tradition and Innovation - Edited by Giuseppe Franco Ferrari - Eleven International Publishing, 2015).
• Sean T. Murphy, Submission to the Special Joint Committee on Physician Assisted Dying, (January 31, 2016).
• Irene Merker Rosenberg & Yale L. Rosenberg, Comparative American and Talmudic Criminal Law, (2016).

From SmartCILP:

• Monica Garcia-Salmones Rovira, Faith, Ritual and Rebellion in 21st Century (Positivist) International Law. (Reviewing Jorge Kammerhofer, Uncertainty in International Law: A Kelsenian Perspective; Jean d'Aspremont, Formalism and the Sources of International Law: A Theory of the Ascertainment of Legal Rules; International Legal Positivism in a Post-Modern World, edited by Jorge Kammerhofer and Jean d'Aspremont) 26 European Journal of International Law 537-555 (2015).
• Mark Strasser, Definitions, Religion, and Free Exercise Guarantees, 51 Tulsa Law Review 1-38 (2015).

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Mu'min v. Wingard, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18479 (WD PA, Feb. 16, 2016), a California federal district court dismissed a Muslim inmate's complaint that he was denied the use of his legal religious name by the religious librarian.

In Simmons v. Upton, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18421 (SD GA, Feb. 16, 2016), a Georgia federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing for failure to exhaust administrative remedies a Muslim inmate's  complaint that the new inmate religious practices policy violated his free exercise rights.

In Watson v. Pressley, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17355 (D SC, Feb. 11, 2016), a South Carolina federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17994, Jan. 21, 2016) and dismissed an inmate's complaints about restrictions on various of his Muslim religious practices.

[CORRECTION] In Hilson v. Beaury, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19844 (ND NY, Feb. 17, 2016), a New York federal district court refused, on the ground of qualified immunity, to allow an inmate to move ahead with his complaint over delay in processing his request to change his religion from Protestant to Muslim. UPDATE:This part of the recommendation was adopted by the court at 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35058, March 18, 2016.

In Clark v. Davis, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19971 (ND CA, Feb.17, 2016), a California federal district court dismissed allowed an inmate's complaint regarding prior prison rules on confidentiality of clergy relationships with death row inmates.

In Trapani v. Pullen, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20500 (ND NY, Feb. 17, 2016), a New York federal district court allowed a Jewish inmate to move ahead with his complaint that he was deprived of kosher meals for a two week period.

Trump's Week of Controversial Religious Allusions

Donald Trump tonight won the South Carolina Republican primary, capping a week in which his religious rhetoric has sparked controversy.  On Thursday, Trump clashed with Pope Francis.  As reported by CNN:

One of the more unlikely battles to jolt a presidential campaign emerged Thursday when Pope Francis said Trump is "not Christian" if he wants to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. Trump, true to form, shot back that the pontiff's comments were "disgraceful."

But by Thursday evening, the GOP front-runner was doing something unusual: de-escalating a fight.

"I don't like fighting with the Pope," Trump said at a GOP town hall in South Carolina hosted by CNN. "I like his personality; I like what he represents."

Trump called the Pope a "wonderful guy" and blamed the day's drama on the press.

Yesterday at a rally in South Carolina, Trump invoked a probably inaccurate story that has circulated on the Internet for years. As reported by the Washington Post:

As the crowd cheered him on, Trump told them about Pershing — “rough guy, rough guy” — who was fighting terrorism in the early 1900s. Trump didn't say where this happened, but variations of this story online usually state that it happened in the Philippines during the Philippine-American War — part of the island nation's protracted battle for independence — early in Pershing’s career.

“They were having terrorism problems, just like we do,” Trump said. “And he caught 50 terrorists who did tremendous damage and killed many people. And he took the 50 terrorists, and he took 50 men and he dipped 50 bullets in pigs’ blood — you heard that, right? He took 50 bullets, and he dipped them in pigs’ blood. And he had his men load his rifles, and he lined up the 50 people, and they shot 49 of those people. And the 50th person, he said: You go back to your people, and you tell them what happened. And for 25 years, there wasn’t a problem...."

Finally, this morning as Vice-President Joe Biden, rather than President Barack Obama, attended Justice Scalia's funeral mass, Donald Trump tweeted:

I wonder if President Obama would have attended the funeral of Justice Scalia if it were held in a Mosque? Very sad that he did not go!

Prayer At School Board Meetings Governed By School Prayer Criteria

In Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Chino Valley Unified School District Board of Education, (CD CA, Feb. 18, 2016), a California federal district court, in a 26-page opinion, held that invocations at school board meetings are governed by case law relating to school prayer, not by the line of cases on legislative prayer. Emphasizing that students regularly attend and make presentations at school board meetings, the court found the invocation policy unconstitutional, saying in part:

Because of the distinct risk of coercing students to participate in, or at least acquiesce to, religious exercises in the public school context, the Court finds the legislative exception does not apply to the policy and practice of prayer in Chino Valley School Board meetings.

The court also invalidated the Board’s practice of praying reading from the Bible and making religious statements at various points in school board meetings. (Court's order).  FFRF issued a press release announcing the decision.

Court Rejects Free Exercise Defense To Federal Cockfighting Conviction

In United States v. Olney, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19947 (ED WA, Feb. 18, 2016), a Washington federal district court, after a bench trial, convicted Shane Scott Olney of sponsoring an Unlawful Animal Fighting Venture in violation of 7 U.S.C. § 2156(a)(1). The court rejected defendant's claim

that as a baptized Catholic, and an enrolled member of the Yakama Nation, he "has a sincerely held religious belief that the Holy Scriptures quoted in Genesis 1:26-28 ... entitles him to rule over his fighting roosters, to breed them, exhibit them, train them, and to present them for gamecock fighting."....

The court explained:

Aside from the fact that the conduct Defendant claims to be protected is not the conduct for which he was tried and convicted, the Court finds the federal statute at issue does not unconstitutionally encroach upon his First Amendment rights....

The Court finds that the statute at issue is a neutral law of general applicability and thus, it is reviewed for a rational basis.... Here, the statute is related to prevention of cruelty to animals and thus, survives rational basis review.