Wednesday, August 30, 2017

8th Circuit: OK To Ban Religious Leafleting On Plaza of Sports Arena

In Ball v. City of Lincoln, Nebraska, (8th Cir., Aug. 29, 2017), the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals held that the city did not infringe the free speech rights of a city resident who insisted on handing out Christian religious literature in the plaza area of a municipal sports arena to those attending high school basketball tournaments. A majority of the 3-judge panel held that the entire plaza area is a non-public forum, and the policy barring leafleting in that area is reasonable. Judge Melloy dissented in part, concluding that a portion of the plaza area is a traditional public forum. Lincoln Journal-Star reports on the decision.

An Unusual Prisoner Case Finds NGE Should Be Held To Be A Religion

In a somewhat surprising prisoner free exercise decision this week, a Virginia federal district court held that the Virginia Department of Corrections violated RLUIPA and the First Amendment when it refused to recognize the Nations of Gods and Earths (NGE) as a religion and instead designated it a gang or "Security Threat Group."  In Coward v. Robinson, (ED VA, Aug. 28, 2017), the court in a 47-page opinion citing what was clearly an extensive evidentiary record concluded that "there is insufficient evidence in this record to conclude that the NGE is a violent, racially supremacist gang."  It went on: "Even if the Department could show that designating the NGE as a gang subject to a zero
tolerance policy serves a compelling interest, it cannot demonstrate that its policies are the least restrictive means of furthering that interest."

A number of things make this case interesting. It was initially filed in 2010. Appeals in the case (sub. nom. Coward v. Jabe) wound their way up to the 4th Circuit three separate times.  In one of its opinions, the 4th Circuit held that even though it had held NGE is not a religion in an unrelated 2012 case, that decision was based on the evidence at trial, and did not mean that NGE would not found to be a religion in other cases.  Finally, unlike the vast majority of prisoner cases which are argued pro se, here plaintiff in the proceedings leading to this week's decision had high power counsel.  Plaintiff was represented by two lawyers from Kirkland & Ellis, one of whom had previously been a law clerk for Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts.

7th Circuit: Illinois May Apply Education Laws To Bible Colleges

In Illinois Bible Colleges Association v. Anderson, (7th Cir., Aug. 29, 2017), the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected challenges to three Illinois statutes that require all colleges to obtain state approval before they may issue degrees.  Plaintiffs claimed that applying these statutes to Bible Colleges violates their 1st and 14th Amendment rights. The Court disagreed, saying;
[Plaintiffs] first argue the Illinois regulations violate the Establishment Clause by entangling the government with their religious operations. However, the plaintiffs have not sought ... approval from the State under the applicable statutes. Therefore, there is no basis to believe that the regulations would infringe on their religious beliefs or practices or would unnecessarily entangle the government in religion.... Likewise, the plaintiffs’ Free Exercise claim fails because the statutes are neutral laws of general application and apply equally to secular and religious institutions. The plaintiffs’ Equal Protection claim fares no better: While the state statutes exempt older educational institutions..., when no improper discrimination is involved, the government may include a grandfather clause in legislation without violating the guarantee of Equal Protection. Finally, the student-plaintiff alleges a violation of his right to practice a profession of his choice. But the regulations do not impact that choice. Rather, they merely determine whether he may obtain a degree from specific post-secondary institutions.

Tuesday, August 29, 2017

French Court Says School Must Offer Muslim Children An Alternative To Pork At Lunch

According to The Guardian yesterday, in France a trial court judge has told local officials that they must re-institute a policy of offering an alternative to pork meals for school lunches. A court in Dijon told officials in Chalon-sur-Saône that a refusal to offer an alternative for Muslim children is not "in keeping with the spirit of the international convention on the rights of children" nor "in the interests of the children." The the mayor of Chalon-sur-Saône, a member of the right wing Les Républicains party, argued that by requiring all children to eat together, the city was upholding the French Republic’s principle of laïcité  (secularism). The city plans an appeal.

Religious Freedom and Holocaust Envoys Escape State Department Cuts

In a move applauded by Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Corker, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has notified the Senate that he plans to pare down the number of Special Envoys in the State Department. According to CNN, Tillerson will eliminate or downgrade as many as 36 of the nearly 70 special envoy spots. However three special envoy offices will be expanded: those dealing with religious freedom, Holocaust issues and HIV/AIDS.

UPDATE: Here is the full text of Sec. Tillerson's letter to Sen. Corker. It details some of the changes as follows:
The Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom (IRF) will continue to be an ambassador-level position confirmed by the U.S. Senate, and will be organized under and report to the Under Secretary for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights (J). Additionally, IRF will assume the functions and staff of the U.S. Special Representative for Religion and Global Affairs, U.S. Special Representative to Muslim Communities, U.S. Special Envoy to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, and Special Advisor for Religious Minorities in the Near East and South/Central Asia.

Suit Challenges Trump Ban On Transgender Individuals In Military

Yesterday three individuals and two advocacy groups filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Trump Administration's recently implemented policy on transgender individuals serving in the military.  The complaint (full text) in Karnoski v. Trump, (WD WA, filed 8/28/2017) summarizes the lawsuit:
5. In the evening of Friday, August 25, 2017, President Trump followed up on his tweets and implemented an official federal policy of discrimination against transgender individuals in military service .... Among other things, President Trump has mandated that the U.S. military return to its earlier policy and practice of discrimination against transgender people, including by discharging them. He has also maintained and extended the current bar on accession into the military of individuals known to be transgender.... Last, he has singled out for adverse treatment the health care needs of transgender service members.
6. Dripping with animus, the Ban and the current accessions bar violate the equal protection and due process guarantees of the Fifth Amendment and the free speech guarantee of the First Amendment. They are unsupported by any compelling, important, or even rational justification.
Lambda Legal announced the filing of the lawsuit.

Monday, August 28, 2017

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:
From SmartCILP:

Sunday, August 27, 2017

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In West v. Palmer, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 131109 (ND IA, Aug. 17, 2017), an Iowa federal district court dismissed a suit by a high security inmate at the Civil Commitment Unit for Sexual Offenders who complained that the facility does not offer Pentecostal religious services and he is not allowed to attend services outside the facility.

In Anderson v. Cox, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 131202 (D NV, Aug. 17, 2017), a Nevada federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing a Wiccan inmate's complaint that Wiccans are denied access to incense, herbs and teas, and that a ritual area used by Wiccans was destroyed.  He recommended that plaintiff be allowed to move ahead with his claim of retaliatory cell searches because of his religion.

In Brisman v. Quinn, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 131523 (ND NY, Aug. 16, 2017), a New York federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing an inmate's claim that a package containing religious beads was not delivered to him.

In Ludwick v. Rubenstein, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130501 (ND WV, Aug. 16, 2017), a West Virginia federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 131620, July 14, 2017) and dismissed an inmate's complaint about removal of religious items from his cell when inmates are on strip cell search.

In Thompson v. Mississippi Department of Corrections, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132387 (ND MI, Aug. 17, 2017), a Mississippi federal district court granted a Rastafarian inmate who had been forced to cut his hair an injunction requiring authorities to allow him to grow his hair according to the tenets of his religion.

In Ahdom v. Etchebehere, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133380 (ED CA, Aug. 20, 2017), a California federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing a Muslim inmate's complaint that as a vegetarian he was not enrolled in the Religious Meat Alternative program, and that made him ineligible to participate in Ramadan meals (until he was ultimately granted an exception).

In Murray v. McKay, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133566 (ED CA, Aug. 18, 2017), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed with leave to amend an inmate's complaint that as a high security inmate with medical issues he was not allowed to attend any church services.

In Fletcher v. Bokinstrke, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133747 (D SC, Aug. 18, 2017), a South Carolina federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 134081, July 14, 2017) and dismissed a Muslim inmate's complaint that on one day during Ramadan, because of a security lock down, he was not served his evening meal until 11:00 pm.

In Hansler v. Kelley, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133096 (WD AR, Aug. 21, 2017), an Arkansas federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 134103, July 20, 2017), and allowed an inmate to move ahead with a number of his claims growing out of the ban on his possessing or reading the Witches' Craft Wiccan Bible and the Book of Grimoires.

In Fisher v. Devore, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136552 (WD AR, Aug.23, 2017), an Arkansas federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135189, July 26, 2017) and dismissed a Jewish inmate's complaint that the kosher meals he was served were not prepared in a way that properly adhered to religious dietary laws.

UPDATE: In a settlement agreement in Bartlett v. Atencio, (D ID, Aug. 11, 2017), Idaho prisons must offer a Common Fare No Touch menu with a majority of meals that are pre-packaged or double-sealed frozen meals that are kosher
certified.

Belarus Court Refuses To Bar Construction On Former Jewish Cemetery Sites

JTA reports that last week a court in Belarus  refused to grant an injunction against two construction projects on the sites of former Jewish cemeteries. The Tsentralny District Court held that it lacks jurisdiction to prevent construction of apartment buildings on two former Jewish cemeteries in the city of Gomel.  The court also refused to enjoin an ongoing project on the site of a former Jewish cemetery in the city of Mozyr.  The suit was filed by Yakov Goodman, an american Jewish activist who is attempting to preserve Jewish heritage sites in Belarus.  Authorities in Gomel said they did not have information indicating that the site was that of a cemetery.

Saturday, August 26, 2017

Trump Implements Continued Ban On Transgender Enlistment In Military

Yesterday President Trump issued a Presidential Memorandum (full text) implementing his previously announced intent to bar enlistment of openly transgender individuals in the U.S. military and to authorize the discharge of those already serving.  This action prevents the change in policy initiated by the Obama administration from taking effect.  President Trump's Memorandum reads in part:
In my judgment, the previous Administration failed to identify a sufficient basis to conclude that terminating the Departments' longstanding policy and practice would not hinder military effectiveness and lethality, disrupt unit cohesion, or tax military resources, and there remain meaningful concerns that further study is needed to ensure that continued implementation of last year's policy change would not have those negative effects....
The Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of Homeland Security with respect to the U.S. Coast Guard, shall:
 (a)  maintain the currently effective policy regarding accession of transgender individuals into military service beyond January 1, 2018, until such time as the Secretary of Defense, after consulting with the Secretary of Homeland Security, provides a recommendation to the contrary that I find convincing; and
 (b)  halt all use of DoD or DHS resources to fund sex reassignment surgical procedures for military personnel, except to the extent necessary to protect the health of an individual who has already begun a course of treatment to reassign his or her sex....
As part of the implementation plan, the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall determine how to address transgender individuals currently serving in the United States military.  Until the Secretary has made that determination, no action may be taken against such individuals under the policy set forth in section 1(b) of this memorandum.

Friday, August 25, 2017

New Mexico Paramilitary Christian Group Members Arrested In Child Abuse Investigation

Earlier this week, New Mexico authorities raided the Fence Lake (NM) compound of the paramilitary Aggressive Christianity Missions Training Corps in a child abuse investigation.  They arrested sect co-leader Deborah Green and two other group members, while another member was arrested in Truth or Consequences, New Mexico. According to People, the defendants are variously charged with child abuse, criminal sexual penetration, failure to report a birth, and bribery of a witness. Peter Green has been charged with 100 counts of criminal penetration of a child.

Four more sect members were arrested yesterday on charges of failing to register the births of their 11 children.  They were apprehended as they were allegedly trying to flee the state in two vans filed with children. Fox News, reporting this, says that the group describes itself as "revolutionary for Jesus" and provides a free spiritual "ammo pack" to anyone requesting one.  Its website includes anti-Semitic and anti-same sex marriage language.

Discussing interviews with ex-members of the sect, AP reports that:
[L]eaders of the Aggressive Christianity Missions Training Corps exercised control over followers by forcing them into hard labor and refusing to give their children medical care. When members complained, sect co-leader Deborah Green would hold "trials" against them for questioning her authority.... The trials led to banishment to isolated sheds without toilets and from the sect's compound without being allowed to take their children....

Fired Employee Loses Religious Discrimination Suit Against Kansas Secretary of State

According to the Topeka Capital-Journal,  a Kansas federal district court jury rejected a religious discrimination claim by a former employee in the business services division in the state Secretary of State's office.  Plaintiff Courtney Canfield claimed that assistant secretary of state Gary Laughlin had told Canfield's grandmother-- a long-time friend of Lauglin's-- that Canfield had been fired because she did not attended church. At trial, the secretary of state's office said it had fired Canfield for sporadic attendance, breaching office cellpohne policies and creating a distraction for other employees.

$1M Award By Religious Arbitration Panel Is Vacated

In Matter of Young Israel of Eltingville, Inc. v Oorah, Inc., (Richmond Cty. NY S.Ct., June 30, 2017), a New York trial court vacated a $1 million damage award entered by a Jewish religious arbitration panel in a long-running dispute between a Young Israel synagogue and the Kars4Kids charitable organization. (See prior posting.)  Apparently the litigation grew out of a disagreement over which entity was responsible for certain renovations in the building which the two organizations agreed to share.  The court held that Sidney Stadler, who held himself out as president of Young Israel at the time the agreement to arbitrate was signed, in fact lacked authority to enter into the arbitration agreement on behalf of the synagogue.

Thursday, August 24, 2017

NY Court Invalidates Service of Process on Sabbath, Focusing On Competing Sabbath Times

New York General Business Law Sec. 13 provides:
Whoever maliciously procures any process in a civil action to be served on Saturday, upon any person who keeps Saturday as holy time, and does not labor on that day, or serves upon him any process returnable on that day, or maliciously procures any civil action to which such person is a party to be adjourned to that day for trial, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
In Signature Bank NA v. Koschitzki, (NY Kings Cty. Sup. Ct., July 27, 2017), a New York state trial court vacated a default judgment against Sabbath observant Jews who were served before the end of the Sabbath on a Saturday afternoon.  Defendants were served at 5:30 pm on November 26, 2016. There are two methods used by Jews to determine when the Sabbath ends.  One method would have resulted in Sabbath ending at 5:15. The other method, relied upon by defendants, would have ended the Sabbath at 5:43. The court said:
The Court understands that there is disagreement as to the time at which Sabbath ends among different groups of observant Jews. This Court does not believe it would be appropriate for it to determine the manner in which religious custom should be observed by any individual group or require that one particular group's traditions be adhered to uniformly. The time asserted by defendants is not unreasonable given the conflicting opinions contained in different religious sources.
Arutz Sheva reporting on the decision has more details on the two computational methods.

Court Interprets Scope of Food Stamp Fraud For Upcoming FLDS Leader's Trial

As previously reported, last year eleven leaders and members of the polygamous FLDS Church were indicted on charges of conspiracy to commit food stamp fraud.  The indictments claim that 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. All defendants except Lyle Jeffs have either reached plea bargains or had charges against them dismissed.  In anticipation of this remaining defendant's trial, the government has filed a motion regarding jury instructions that will be given. In United States v. Jeffs, (D UT, Aug. 23, 2017), the court ruled that it will not instruct the jury that donating food items acquired through SNAP benefits is illegal, saying in part:
donation of SNAP benefits (i.e., the funds provided to a household on an EBT card) without the exchange of food products is prohibited.... SNAP benefits may only be used by the household to purchase eligible food for the household. Thus, the funds placed on the EBT card must be used to purchase eligible food for the household and any other use of those funds, including donation, is prohibited. However, there is no statute or regulation that would prohibit the donation of food items obtained through the use of SNAP benefits.
The court said that otherwise a SNAP recipient could be prosecuted "if they donated cookies to a school bake sale that were made from food obtained through the use of SNAP benefits." Fox13 News reports on details.

Christian Group Sues Southern Poverty Law Center Over "Hate Group" Label

The Fort Lauderdale, Florida-based D. James Kennedy Ministries on Tuesday filed suit in an Alabama federal district court against the Southern Poverty Law Center for damages suffered when SPLC placed the Christian group on its Anti-LGBT Hate Group list. According to Al.com:
The lawsuit alleges that the SPLC "illegally trafficked in false and misleading descriptions of the services offered by DJKM and committed defamation against DJKM arising from the publication and distribution of false information that libels the ministry's reputation and subjects the ministry to disgrace, ridicule, odium, and contempt in the estimation of the public," according to a statement by the ministry....
Other defendants in the lawsuit include Amazon and Guidestar. The ministry alleges that it was excluded from the Amazon Smile program, which allows customers to donate to the charity of their choice when making a purchase.

Coach Loses Bid To Pray On 50-Yard Line

In Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, (9th Cir., Aug. 23, 2017),  the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's denial of a preliminary injunction sought by a Washington-state high school football coach who in a widely publicized challenge to his school district was suspended for kneeling and praying on the football field 50-yard line immediately after games.  The appeals court concluded that Coach Joseph Kennedy was not likely to succeed on the merits of his free speech claim  It held that in kneeling and praying on the 50-yard line, Kennedy was speaking as part of his public employment.  His employer had the right to order him not to speak in his official capacity in the manner which he did.  The court added:
On Friday nights, many cities and towns across America temporarily shut down while communities gather to watch high school football games. Students and families from all walks of life join “to root for a common cause” and admire the young people who step proudly onto the field.... While we “recognize the important role that public worship plays in many communities, as well as the sincere desire to include public prayer as a part of [these] occasions,” such activity can promote disunity along religious lines, and risks alienating valued community members from an environment that must be open and welcoming to all.... That is why the “preservation and transmission of religious beliefs and worship is a responsibility and a choice committed to the private sphere, which itself is promised freedom to pursue that mission.”
Judge Smith filed a concurring opinion to express his view that the school district's actions actions were also justified to avoid violating the Establishment Clause. The majority held that it need not reach the Establishment Clause issue.  Kitsap Sun reports on the decision.

Religious Order Loses Attempt to Stop Pipeline

In Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Co., LLC v. Permanent Easement for 2.14 Acres, (ED PA, Aug. 23, 2017), a Pennsylvania federal district court held that Transcontinental Pipeline Co. has the right to condemn and take immediate possession of property of the Adorers of Christ religious order so that the company can build its Atlantic Sunrise Pipeline.  The court said in part:
Adorers claim that they "exercise their religious beliefs by, among other things, caring for and protecting the land they own," and that their efforts to "preserve the sacredness of God's Earth" are integral to the practice of their faith.  However, the Adorers have failed to establish how Transco's possession of the right of way on their land will in any way affect their ability to practice their faith and spread their message. They have not presented one piece of evidence that demonstrates how their religious beliefs will be abridged in any way.

Wednesday, August 23, 2017

Fired Pastor's Contract Suit Dismissed Under Ministerial Exception and Excessive Entanglement Doctrines

In Lee v. Sixth Mount Zion Baptist Church of Pittsburg, (WD PA, Aug. 22, 2017), a Pennsylvania federal district court dismissed a breach of contract claim brought by a pastor against the church that had terminated his employment.  Rev. William Lee claims that the church breached his contract by not compensating him under the clause relating to termination without cause. the church argued that Lee was terminated for failing to fulfill his duties and responsibilities under the contract. The court dismissed on ministerial exception and excessive entanglement grounds, saying in part:
[T]he “ministerial exception” recognizes the right of a religious institution in exercising its First Amendment guarantee of religious liberty and autonomy in matters ecclesiastical to terminate from employment a Pastor such as Rev. Lee. Rev. Lee’s dispute with the Church regarding his termination from employment fully implicates such rights....
The Church argues that where Rev. Lee failed in spiritual stewardship, financial stewardship and responsiveness to Church leadership, as determined by the Church and its Congregation, his termination was for cause under § 12.3.... 
[T]he Court concludes that any determination whether Rev. Lee failed in his spiritual and financial stewardship and responsiveness to Church leaders is a matter best left to the Church alone. Otherwise, the Court and jury would need to probe how the Church evaluated spiritual success and leadership under its doctrine.... Prohibited considerations of ecclesiastical hierarchy are directly implicated in the assessment that Rev. Lee did not adequately respond to Church leadership.

Tuesday, August 22, 2017

India's Supreme Court Invalidates Triple Talaq Divorces For Muslims

India's Supreme Court today, by a vote of 3-2, invalidated the Sunni Muslim practice of divorce by triple talaq.  In Bano v. Union of India, (India S.Ct., Aug. 22, 2017), in 3 opinions spanning 395 pages, three justices agreed (in 2 separate opinions) that triple talaq is invalid.  Two other justices concluded that the practice is not unconstitutional, but urged the government to legislate on the matter within 6 months and would have enjoined use of the divorce procedure during that period.

Justice Nariman's opinion, joined by Justice Lalit concluded:
it is clear that this form of Talaq is manifestly arbitrary in the sense that the marital tie can be broken capriciously and whimsically by a Muslim man without any attempt at reconciliation so as to save it. This form of Talaq must, therefore, be held to be violative of the fundamental right contained under Article 14 [Right to Equality] of the Constitution of India. In our opinion, therefore, the 1937 Act [Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act], insofar as it seeks to recognize and enforce Triple Talaq ... must be struck down as being void to the extent that it recognizes and enforces Triple Talaq.
Justice Joseph concluded that "triple talaq is against the basic tenets of the Holy Quran and consequently, it violates Shariat."  He continued:
The whole purpose of the 1937 Act was to declare Shariat as the rule of decision and to discontinue anti-Shariat practices with respect to subjects enumerated in Section 2 which include talaq. Therefore, in any case, after the introduction of the 1937 Act, no practice against the tenets of Quran is permissible.... What is held to be bad in the Holy Quran cannot be good in Shariat and, in that sense, what is bad in theology is bad in law as well.
Chief Justice Khehar, Joined by Justice Nazeer, concluded that triple talaq is protected by Article 25 of the Constitution that protects freedom of religion, saying in part:
It is not for a court to determine whether religious practices were prudent or progressive or regressive. Religion and ‘personal law’, must be perceived, as it is accepted, by the followers of the faith. And not, how another would like it to be (-including self-proclaimed rationalists, of the same faith). Article 25 obliges all Constitutional Courts to protect ‘personal laws’ and not to find fault therewith. Interference in matters of ‘personal law’ is clearly beyond judicial examination....
However, he qualified this by calling on the government to modify the situation by legislation, saying:
[we] are satisfied, that this is a case which presents a situation where this Court should exercise its discretion to issue appropriate directions under Article 142 of the Constitution. We therefore hereby direct, the Union of India to consider appropriate legislation, particularly with reference to ‘talaq-e-biddat’. We hope and expect, that the contemplated legislation will also take into consideration advances in Muslim ‘personal law’ – ‘Shariat’, as have been corrected by legislation the world over, even by theocratic Islamic States....
Till such time as legislation in the matter is considered, we are satisfied in injuncting Muslim husbands, from pronouncing ‘talaq-e-biddat' as a means for severing their matrimonial relationship. The instant injunction, shall in the first instance, be operative for a period of six months.
The Quint reports on the decision.