Religion Clause

Friday, August 24, 2018

Iowa Pharmacy Board's Refusal To Recommend Cannabis Exception Is Challenged

A petition (full text) for review of a July 18 decision by the Iowa Board of Pharmacy has been filed in an Iowa state trial court. In Olsen v. Iowa Board of Pharmacy, (IA Dist. Ct., filed 8/15/2018), petitioner contends that the Pharmacy Board abused its discretion when it refused to recommend to the state legislature that an exemption be added to the state drug laws to exempt religious use of cannabis by Rastafari. The Board took the position that it lacks expertise to evaluate the use of controlled substances for religious purposes. A number of posts on the issue are at Carl Olsen's Blog.

Washington's Work-Study Program Challenged Over Non-Sectarian Employer Requirement

A suit was filed last week in federal district court in the state of Washington challenging Washington's structuring of its Work-Study program. The Program provides financial aid to college students by paying part of a student's salary when the student is working for a participating employer, usually in a field related to the student's studies. Eligible employers, and jobs themselves, must be non-sectarian. The complaint (full text) in Summit Christian Academy v. Meotti, (WD WA, filed 8/14/2018) contends that excluding religious employers and sectarian work violates the free exercise clause, the equal protection clause and the Establishment Clause. Institute for Justice issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

Thursday, August 23, 2018

Arkansas Commission Refuses To Dismiss Complaint Against Anti-Death Penalty Judge

In an Aug. 20 Order (full text begins at pg. 5) the Arkansas Judicial Discipline and Disability Commission refused to dismiss Allegations (full text) filed in June against Circuit Court Judge Wendell Griffen complaining about his granting of a temporary restraining order barring use for executions of vecuronium bromide sold to the state. (Background). Griffen is charged with violating the Judicial Canon requiring impartiality through his participation in religious anti-death penalty rallies and vigils. Magnolia Banner News reports on the Commission's order.

Judge Authorizes Shut-Down of Cannabis-Based Church

A Riverside, California trial court judge last week authorized the city of Jurupa Valley to close down the Vault Church of Open Faith, a cannabis-based church that lists the prices for various kinds of marijuana online. According to the Press-Enterprise, the Vault's lead minister, Gilbert Aguirre, who has no formal religious training typically leads services which often include smoking or eating marijuana products. Jurupa Valley bans marijuana businesses of all kinds.

Muslim School Sues City Over Harassment At City Pool

A Muslim school in Wilmington, Delaware has filed suit against the city alleging religious discrimination against students in the school's summer day camp by personnel at the city's swimming pool. According to yesterday's Delaware Public Media, pool workers harassed pre-school students in the summer program of Darul Amaanah Academy because of the students' religious attire. Pool workers say they were enforcing a no-cotton policy, but parents say that children were traumatized.

Suit Challenges Exclusion of Sectarian Schools From Maine's High School Tuition Program

In Maine, small school districts that do not operate their own high schools or contract with a specific school for educational purposes, pay tuition for residents to attend a high school elsewhere in the state. However state law bars paying tuition for students to attend sectarian schools. On Monday a suit was filed challenging that exclusion. The complaint (full text) in Carson v. Hasson, (D ME, filed 8/21/2018), alleges that this exclusion violates the 1st and 14th Amendments. In a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit, First Liberty described the claims:

By singling out religious schools, and religious schools only, for discrimination, Maine violates the religious freedom and equal protection guarantees of the U.S. Constitution. As the U.S. Supreme Court’s Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for a 7-2 majority in last year’s Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer decision, excluding a church “from a public benefit for which it is otherwise qualified, solely because it is a church, is odious to our Constitution…and cannot stand.” Armed with this recent decision, IJ and FLI’s clients intend to vindicate the principle that government programs cannot discriminate against religion.

Wednesday, August 22, 2018

Court Orders More Briefs On RFRA Defense By Peace Protesters

In an Order last week in United States v. Kelly, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138195, (SD GA, Aug. 15, 2018), a Georgia federal magistrate judge instructed both sides to provide additional briefing on the "particularized issues raised by Defendants' RFRA defense" in the prosecution of peace activists for breaking into Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay. Defendants argue that their "symbolic disarmament" of nuclear weapons at the base was an exercise of their sincerely held Catholic beliefs. In ordering additional briefs, the court said in part:

At the August 2, 2018 motions hearing, counsel for both the Government and Defendants represented to the Court that Defendants' RFRA claim as a defense to criminal prosecution was an issue of first impression and that the applicability of RFRA to federal criminal law was an open question.... Subsequent to the hearing, however, the Government filed Supplemental Briefing that acknowledged RFRA's applicability to criminal prosecutions and its availability as a defense.... The Government now contends that Defendants' actions ... were not religious in nature and ... even assuming they were, the Government contends it has a compelling interest in protecting Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay....

Brunswick News reports on the court's Order.

Open Meeting Lawsuit Filed Growing Out of Alleged Anti-Jewish Curricular Materials

Jewish News Syndicate reports on a taxpayer lawsuit filed last week in state court in Massachusetts growing out of an ongoing dispute over teaching materials used in the Newton school system. Newton residents have contended that the schools are using anti-Jewish anti-Israel educational materials, including ones funded by the Saudi oil company ARAMCO and the government of Qatar. The lawsuit alleges violations of the state's open meeting laws, contending that month after month the minutes of the meetings of the Newton School Committee deliberately omit names and summaries of remarks by citizens who have appeared before the committee to complain about anti-Jewish materials and Islamic religious lessons. Critics of the curriculum also urge the firing of the current school superintendent.

Tuesday, August 21, 2018

Switzerland Denies Citizenship To Muslim Couple For Their Rejection of Gender Equality

BBC News reported last week that Swiss authorities have denied the citizenship application of a Muslim couple who refused to shake hands with individuals of the opposite sex during their citizenship interview. To obtain citizenship, an applicant must be well integrated into the Swiss community and demonstrate an attachment to the country, its institutions and a respect for its legal order. According to the report:

Officials stressed they were not rejected based on their religion but for their lack of respect for gender equality.

[Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Conservative Christian Groups Oppose Arkansas Tort Reform Ballot Measure

AP reports that Arkansas' proposed constitutional amendment on tort reform (full text) is receiving surprising opposition from conservative Christian anti-abortion groups:

A Christian group has begun rallying churches and abortion opponents against the measure, saying that limiting damage awards in lawsuits sets an arbitrary value on human life, contrary to anti-abortion beliefs, and conflicts with biblical principles of justice and helping the poor....

The Family Council, which championed Arkansas’ ban on gay marriages, is organizing meetings with church leaders to call for the measure’s rejection.

“The Bible is full of references to justice, and [the proposal] creates an environment where the powerful can tip the scales of justice against everybody else, but especially the poor,” Jerry Cox, the Family Council’s head, said at a recent breakfast meeting with pastors.

Pastors were handed informational booklets emblazoned with the words “Don’t Put A Price Tag On Human Life.” Flyers left on each table offered attendees inserts for their church bulletins.

Court Says Religious Commitment To Climate Justice Prevails Over Historic Preservation Rules

According to the Keene Sentinel, last week a Massachusetts trial court judge ruled that a church's religious commitment to climate justice takes precedence over historic preservation rules:

A Massachusetts Superior Court judge last week ordered Bedford’s Historic District Commission to allow the First Parish Church to install solar panels on the roof of the sanctuary. In what could be a precedent-setting decision, the congregation can install panels to generate electricity in keeping with a principle of “climate justice.” John Gibbons, senior minister of the church, said in a press release, “This ruling makes it possible for us to give more than lip service to our religious values, to walk our talk and to live in greater harmony with the rhythms of nature.”

In other words, parishioners believed they needed to do something to cut carbon emissions to protect the earth. That principle of their faith overruled a strict adherence to preservation of the historic character of their 200-year-old building.

DC Circuit Remands Suit On Anti-Sharia Bus Ads

In American Freedom Defense Initiative v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, (DC Cir., Aug. 17, 2018), the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals remanded for further development of an argument based on a intervening Supreme Court decision a challenge to WMATA's guidelines on advertising that may be displayed on buses and in rail stations. At issue is the constitutionality of a ban on "advertisements intended to influence members of the public regarding an issue on which there are varying opinions." AFDI wanted to rent space to display ads that

make the point that the First Amendment will not yield to Sharia adherent Islamists who want to enforce so-called blasphemy laws here in the United States, whether through threats of violence or through the actions of complicit government officials.

In a 2-1 decision, the majority held that WMATA did not engage in viewpoint discrimination in rejecting the ad. However, the U.S. Supreme Court's June 2018 decision in Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky , according to the majority, raised an additional issue that the parties should have the opportunity to brief:

whether the discretion vested in a government official to permit or prohibit speech is “guided by objective, workable standards.” Mansky, 138 S. Ct. at 1891.... We must determine whether Guideline 9 is so broad as to provide WMATA with no meaningful constraint upon its exercise of the power to squelch.....

The parties’ briefs predate the decision in Mansky. Yet Mansky invites arguments about whether Guideline 9 is capable of reasoned application.

Judge Henderson dissented, arguing that the suit should be dismissed on mootness grounds. WTOP reports on the decision.

Monday, August 20, 2018

VA Doctor's Statement Did Not Violate Establishment Clause

In Rose v. Borsos, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139466 (ED TN, Aug. 17. 2018), a Tennessee federal district court dismissed a claim by a VA hospital patient that a VA doctor violated the Establishment Clause when the doctor told the patient that "God would forgive [him] for committing suicide because of uncontrolled pain."

Trinity Western Drops Community Covenant Requirement For Students

As previously reported, in June the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the decision by two provinces to refuse to accredit Trinity Western University's proposed new law school. The provinces took the action because of the University's religious-based Community Covenant which, among other things, barred students, faculty and staff from "sexual intimacy that violates the sacredness of marriage between a man and a woman." In response, last week the University announced that the Covenant will no longer be mandatory for students. However, as reported by Inside Higher Ed, the Covenant will remain mandatory for faculty, staff and administrators. [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead via TaxProf Blog.]

Sunday, August 19, 2018

Court Awards Attorneys' Fees In Contraceptive Mandate Case

In Catholic Benefits Association LCA v. Azar, (WD OK, Aug. 15, 2018), an Oklahoma federal district court awarded attorneys' fees that were dramatically lower than requested by plaintiff's counsel. The case was one of the lengthy challenges to the Obama Administration's contraceptive coverage mandate's applicability to religious non-profit organizations. Plaintiffs' counsel requested $3.1 million in fees. In a 36-page opinion, the court ultimately awarded $718,607 in fees and expenses.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Smith v. Penzone, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135075 (D AZ, Aug. 10, 2018), an Arizona federal district court dismissed an inmate's complaint that he was denied assistance with a three-day fast based on the Christian faith surrounding the Ritualistic Day of Atonement, and was denied religious services.

In Robinson v. Cameron, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135394 (WD PA, Aug. 9. 2018), a Pennsylvania federal magistrate judge, in a case on remand from the 3rd Circuit, recommended dismissing an inmate's complaint that the sex offender program's requirement that he take responsibility for his offenses amounts to a religious confession which is only to be made to God through Jesus.

In Kelly v. Warden, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135602 (SD CA, Aug. 10, 2018), a California federal district court allowed a Catholic inmate to move ahead with his complaint that he was not allowed to change his name to that of his stepfather, which he needed to do to obey the religious obligation to honor his father.

In Chrisco v. Scoleri, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136238 (D CO, Aug. 13, 2018), a Colorado federal magistrate judge dismissed an inmate's complaint that he was forcibly medicated because of his religious belief in Alchemical Christianity.

In Woodward v. Ali, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136436 (ND NY, Aug. 10, 2018), a New York federal magistrate judge recommended that a Muslim inmate be allowed to move ahead with his complaint that he was removed from the Ramadan meal list, and this was done in retaliation for a complaint he filed against the Muslim chaplain.

In Grayson v. Furlow, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136446 (SD IL, Aug. 13, 2018), an Illinois federal magistrate judge allowed an inmate who is a member of the African Hebrew Israelites of Jerusalem and who has taken the Nazirite vow to move ahead with his complaint that his dreadlocks were forcibly cut off in order to have a second identification photo taken.

In Wright v. Lassiter, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136823 (WD NC, Aug. 13, 2018), a North Carolina federal district court dismissed an inmate's claims that his religious items were confiscated on various occasions.

In Wilbur v. Fitzpatrick, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136898 (D ME, Aug. 14, 2018), a Maine federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing an inmate's complaint that he was denied access to attend religious services and other faith activities as the result of disciplinary restrictions.

In Snowden v. Prince George's County Department of Corrections, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137107 (D MD, Aug. 14, 2018), a Maryland federal district court allowed Muslim inmates to move ahead with their complaint that they were not permitted to perform Friday religious services or daily congregational prayer, while authorities arranged services for Christian inmates.

In McMillan v. Hughes, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138953 (D NJ, Aug. 16, 2018), a New Jersey federal district court dismissed an inmate's complaint that officers humiliated him by criticizing his religious requirement of trimming excessive pubic hair.

Saturday, August 18, 2018

EEOC Sues Over Hostile Treatment of Catholic Employee

The EEOC announced on Thursday that it had filed a Title VII lawsuit against New Jersey-based Hackensack Meridian Health alleging a manager's religious harassment of a Catholic employee. According to the press release:

Hackensack was aware of but failed to stop a hostile work environment at its Edison, N.J., facility. Shortly after the employee was hired to perform clinical data analytics work, his manager learned he was Catholic and reacted negatively upon seeing a crucifix in the employee's office. Since then, the manager regularly belittled him, screamed at him, and ridiculed his work in front of others.

Friday, August 17, 2018

Dutch High Court Rules Pastafarianism Is Not A Religion

The Guardian reported yesterday that Netherlands highest court, the Council of State, has ruled that law student Mienke de Wilde who is a Pastafarian cannot wear a colander on her head in her passport and drivers license photo. While Dutch law allows the head to be partially covered for such photos for genuine religious reasons, the court ruled that the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster lacks the seriousness and coherence required of a religion. The court said:

It is important to be able to criticise religious dogma freely through satire but that does not make such criticism a serious religion.

Court Not Barred From Adjudicating Church Merger

In Pure Presbyterian Church of Washington v. Grace of God Presbyterian Church, (VA Sup. Ct., Aug. 16, 2018), the Virginia Supreme Court affirmed a trial court's judgment enforcing a merger agreement between two local Korean speaking Presbyterian churches. Seven months after the congregations had been worshiping together, one of the congregations attempted to withdraw from the merger. The other congregation sued to validate the merger. The Supreme Court rejected the argument that it lacked jurisdiction under the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine, saying in part:

There is nothing inherently ecclesiastical about an agreement to merge two entities. Although a dispute over the existence or effect of a merger agreement could turn on questions of church doctrine, that is not the case here. Contract law principles are “neutral principles” of law that courts can employ to resolve a dispute between churches. Whether a church voted to merge is a question of fact that does not require a court to resolve an “ecclesiastical” question. Although the merger agreement spelled out who would continue to serve as pastor and which entity would survive, neither of the parties, nor the court, relied on any theological or ecclesiastical principles to resolve the issue of whether the churches agreed to merge and whether Grace Presbyterian honored its commitment under the merger agreement.