Florida Voucher Programs Face Uncertain Future

Yesterday's Lakeland, Florida Ledger reports on the latest skirmish on school vouchers in the Florida. In January the Florida Supreme Court struck down the state's Opportunity Scholarship Program on state constitutional grounds, holding that the program interfered with the state's providing a "uniform" school system. The Court did not reach the issue of whether the program violates the state constitution's prohibition on aid to religious organizations. (See prior posting.)

Now pro-voucher politicians, including Governor Jeb Bush, want an amendment to the state constitution to protect vouchers, claiming that otherwise the ACLU will bring suit to invalidate those voucher programs still in existence. However, the ACLU says it has no intention of challenging either the McKay Scholarship Plan for students with special needs or the Bright Futures program that provides funds for college students. The Florida House of Representatives has a proposed constitutional amendment under consideration, but nothing has happened in the Senate.

The House measure, HJR 1573, proposes a constitutional amendment that provides, in part: "the Legislature is not limited from enacting and funding for the people education programs, public or private, without regard to the religious nature of any provider or participant..." The amendment would also provide that "every child deserves an equal opportunity to receive a quality education regardless of his or her family's income, religion or race. Funding for quality education through classroom instruction is paramount, and the legislature shall ensure that funding provided for public schools shall primarily be used for classroom instruction rather than administrative expenditures."

John Kirtley, a Tampa millionaire who has supported vouchers, says that the ACLU's statement that it does not intend to challenge the McKay or Bright futures programs is a ruse. He thinks the group will wait until it is too late to get a constitutional amendment on the November ballot, and will then file suit against remaining voucher programs. The ACLU agrees that it is considering challenging a program approved in 2002 that funds private pre-school programs, including programs run by religious groups.

Rahman Case Sent Back to Prosecutors; Protests In Some Cities

Yesterday, Afghanistan's Supreme Court, under intense pressure from Western countries, dismissed the case against Abdul Rahman and sent it back to prosecutors to look into problems with the evidence against him, according to reports in yesterday's Guardian and today's Financial Times. Judge Ansarullah Maulavezada, who had been set to try Abdul Rahman for converting from Islam to Christianity, said the case had been dropped because of questions over Rahman's mental state and whether he held dual citizenship in Germany. Meanwhile, Rahman asked for a Bible, insisting he was sane and was willing to die for his faith.

Rahman is being moved to to Pul-i-Charki, a high security facility housing hundreds of Taliban convicts, after fellow prisoners threatened to kill him at Kabul's main jail. Deputy Attorney General Mohammed Eshaq Aloko said Rahman would be sent to the Aliabad hospital in Kabul for psychiatric evaluation and might be examined by U.S. or NATO doctors. He raised the possibility that Rahman might be sent abroad for treatment, opening the possibility of his being granted political asylum abroad.

Meanwhile, India's NDTV reports that thee has been a "massive uproar" across Pakistan in protest against the court's decision to dismiss the Rahman case. Thousands protested in the northern city of Mazar-e-Sharif.

In a related development, in India, the Supreme Court has before it a petition to dissolve all Islamic and Sharia courts in the country. Outlook India today reports that Advocate Vishwa Lochan Madan filed the complaint, alleging that the courts threaten the Indian judicial system.

UPDATE: A March 28 report from the Chicago Tribune says that Rahman has been released into the custody of the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission and the United Nations mission in Afghanistan. Also, it appears that Monday's demonstrations in Mazar-e-Sharif involved hundreds, not thousands as reported above.

Coast Guard Policy On Religious Head Coverings May Change

This week, the Coast Guard's Uniform Board will meet in Washington. On its agenda, according to today's New York Times, is the issue of whether it will relax its restrictions on wearing of religious head coverings with Coast Guard Uniforms. The Times article recounts the problems faced by Jack Rosenberg, a Hasidic Jew who is a certified pilot and has enlisted in the Coast Guard. While his skullcap is concealed by his uniform hat worn outdoors, wearing his skullcap indoors would violate the Coast Guard General Uniform Policy (Sec. 2.A.1.) requiring that religious items must be concealed or worn only during religious services.

The other military services have a different rule. Back in 1986, in the case of Goldman v. Weinberger, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Air Force regulations that prohibited an Orthodox Jewish Air Force officer from wearing his yarmulke indoors. However, Congress quickly responded and in 1987 enacted 10 USC 774 that permits members of the armed forces to wear "neat and conservative" items of religious apparel with their uniforms so long as the item does not interfere with performance of military duties. The Department of Defense promulgated regulations consistent with the provision. Department of Defense Directive DODD-1300.17 (Feb. 3, 1988). Since the Coast guard is under the Department of Homeland Security rather than the Department of Defense, DOD directives apparently do not apply to it, even though it would seem that 10 USC 774 also applies to the Coast Guard. 10 USC 101 defines "armed forces" for purposes of Title 10 to include the Coast Guard.

Inmate Claims Veganism Is a Religious Belief

Does belief in a vegan diet amount to a religion? That is the contention in a lawsuit filed against Sacramento, California's jail by Eric Taylor McDavid who is being held there on charges of conspiring to blow up Nimbus Dam and a nearby fish hatchery in Rancho Cordova, and a U.S. Forest Service genetics lab in Placerville. According to today's report from the Sacramento Bee, Mark Reichel, McDavid's attorney, argues that his client's beliefs are protected under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. He claims his client's avoidance of animal products comes from "strongly, sincerely and firmly held beliefs, which are the same as a religious belief."

The sheriff's legal affairs spokesman, Lt. Scott Jones, says veganism is a lifestyle choice. He says the jail only makes dietary accommodations for medical reasons, and McDavid will get sufficient nutrition even if he only eats the acceptable portions of his meals. Also, inmates who keep kosher, halal and vegetarian diets can supplement their diets with items for sale in the jail's commissary. Jerry Read of the Corrections Standards Authority said his office does not regulate religious diets. He adds, "Case law changes too often. It comes up a lot - I don't know how many lawsuits there are, but enough that we can't keep up with it."

Prince Charles Speaks At Conservative Saudi University

As part of his tour of the Middle East, yesterday Britain's Prince Charles spoke to a small VIP audience at Imam Muhammad Saud Islamic University. The Associated Press reported on the visit. The University, which produces many of Saudi Arabia's Wahhabi clerics and Islamic judges, is seen by many as the center of Saudi conservatism. While Charles did not specifically mention the lack of religious freedom in Saudi Arabia, he did say: "Islam called Jews and Christians the peoples of the book because they, like Muslims, are a part of a religion of sacred texts." Because the sexes are segregated in Saudi Arabia, Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall, had a different schedule from her husband. She visited the Nahda Philanthropic Society for Women, the first women's charity to be set up in Saudi Arabia.

Some Thoughts On The Rahman Case and the Issue of Religious Conversion

The fate in Afghanistan of Abdul Rahman, the Muslim convert to Christianity who is threatened with capital punishment, continues to draw worldwide attention. Less attention has been given, however, to the origins of the situation. Free Internet Press yesterday carried one of the most complete accounts. The Daily Telegraph , Reuters , Washington Times and the Baptist Standard all add some details. Rahman converted some 15 years ago while living in Pakistan and working for a Christian group that was offering aid to Afghan refugees. His conversion led his wife to obtain a divorce, and her family took custody of the couple's children. Rahman moved around, living in Germany and Belgium. Finally, having been denied asylum in Belgium, Rahman recently returned to Afghanistan and attempted to obtain custody of his two daughters. Since Afghan courts give custody to Muslims over apostates, Rahman's father-in-law, in order to retain custody, informed the court about Rahman's conversion.

Radio Free Afghanistan today posted a detailed analysis of the issue of apostasy under Islamic law. It's author, Joyce M. Davis, points out that not all Islamic scholars advocate the death penalty for those who leave the faith. Meanwhile, pressure on Afghan president Hamid Karzai continued. A letter in Pope Benedict XVI's name was sent to Karzai by Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Angelo Sodano. BBC News today reports that the letter appealed to Karzai to respect freedom of conscience and religion guaranteed by the Afghan Constitution.

Conversion to other faiths is not a concern only to Islam or to Afghans. In the Indian state of Rajasthan, according to today's New India Press, the cabinet has just approved a bill that would impose a jail term of 2 to 5 years for "forceful" religious conversion. The bill would cover conversions through social boycotts, intimidating a person in the name of God, or any threat leading to personal losses. Encouraging a person to convert by promising financial assistance or personal profit would also violate the law. As Asia News reported earlier this week, India's largest political party, the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party, has repeatedly argued that Christian missionaries practice "terrorism" against tribal communities. Last Tuesday, thousands of Christians, joined by Muslims and others, marched to protest growing violence against Christians in Rajisthan.

Courts Rule On When Cases Pose Theological Issues

Two cases that have recently become available involve the question of when adjudication of a dispute will involve the court in deciding issues of religious doctrine.

In Geiser v. International Church of the Foursquare Gospel, (Cal. Ct. App., March 22, 2006), a California appellate court, while upholding a volunteer assistant pastor’s claim against a church for battery, dismissed his claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress. The court held that the First Amendment requirement that a court not become involved in adjudicating issues of religious practice or orthodoxy precluded it from deciding the validity of the claim which was based on accusations that plaintiff made "unauthorized deliverances" and refused to "follow church policy". Deciding the case would involve the court in deciding the truth or falsity of defendant’s religious beliefs, or at least in making judgments about them. That, in turn, would place the court’s imprimatur on one version of church doctrine over another.

A case from Montana, decided some ten months ago, has just become available on LEXIS. In Raihl v. Passmore, 2005 Mont. Dist. LEXIS 1464 (Mont. Dist. Ct., July 21, 2005), a Montana trial court held that issues of negligent hiring, negligent supervision, breach of fiduciary duty and intentional infliction of emotional distress involving the Church of God could be decided without inquiring into religious teachings and beliefs. The court added: "to dismiss these causes of action on that basis would give a clear, green light to any church to conduct themselves in the same fashion given similar circumstances."

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Phipps v. Morgan, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12199 (ED Wash., March 6, 2006) a Washington federal district judge adopted the Magistrate’s recommendations and upheld a state prison’s policy of serving ovo-lacto vegetarian meals to Muslim prisoners requesting a Halal diet. The Magistrate Judge’s opinion is at 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12198 (ED Wash., Jan. 13, 2006).

Following up an earlier decision permitting a Native American prisoner to move forward with his suit claiming he was intentionally denied the right to attend religious pipe and drum ceremonies, a Wisconsin federal district judge issued an opinion outlining in detail to the pro se litigant the exact procedures he must follow at trial and the elements that he must prove to win his case. Meyer v. Teslik, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5700 (WD Wis., Feb. 10, 2006). (Earlier decision discussed here.)

In Blount v. Johnson, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11961 WD Va., March 2, 2006), a Virginia federal district judge denied prison officials’ motion of summary judgment and sent to the Magistrate Judge for trial a Virginia state prisoner’s claims under the Free Exercise clause and RLUIPA. Inmate Donell Blount who was a member of the House of Yahweh was denied his request to be served the Common Fare Diet because officials determined that his religion did not require it. Subsequently the Virginia Department of Corrections added House of Yahweh to the list of religions requiring a special diet.

In Pepper v. Carroll, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11907 (D. Del., March 22, 2006), a Delaware federal district court rather summarily reject a prisoner’s claim that his free exercise rights were infringed when he was not furnished a television set on which to watch church services. He was, at his own request, housed in the Security Housing Unit where televisions are not permitted.

In Stewart v. Barr, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11516 (D. Wis., March 17, 2006), a Wisconsin federal district court granted summary judgment to prison authorities, finding they had shown a legitimate penological reason for their requirement that plaintiff, a prisoner claiming to be a Rastafarian, remove his dreadlocks before leaving the prison for medical treatment.

City Considering Law To Limit Pickets Protesting Jewish Divorce Concerns

Washington Jewish Week reports today that in Gaithersburg, Maryland, city council held a public hearing Monday night on an emergency ordinance that would restrict pickets in front of the house of Gaithersburg resident Sam Rosenbloom. The protesters are attempting to convince Rosenbloom to grant a "get" (Jewish bill of divorce) to his wife Sarah. The couple was granted a civil divorce almost six years ago, but Sam Rosenbloom refuses to give his ex-wife a get because she filed a criminal complaint against him. The complaint was dropped before coming to trial, but Sarah has refused to apologize and make restitution. Under Jewish law, a woman may not remarry until her husband gives her a "get".

Protests in front of Rosenbloom's home have been held for almost two years, and recently have been occurring on an almost weekly basis. They are organized by the New York-based Organization for the Resolution of Agunot. Pickets hope that signs and slogans such as "Unchain your wife" will "apply social pressure to free" Sarah Rosenbloom. The proposed ordinance (full text) would prohibit picketing by or in front of a private residence, though it would not ban marching in a residential area without stopping in front of a particular home. It would also not apply if the residence was also the occupant's sole place of business or if a public meeting were being held there. A similar law was upheld against constitutional attack by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1988 in Frisby v. Schultz. Protesters said that if the new law is passed, they will continue their protests in conformity with it. [Thanks to Eugene Volokh via Religionlaw for the lead.]

Easter Bunny Banned From City Hall

Yesterday's Washington Post reports that Easter this year is bringing a mini-rerun of the "Christmas wars". In St. Paul, Minnesota, a secretary had placed a toy rabbit, pastel-colored eggs and a sign with the words "Happy Easter" in the lobby of City Council offices. But St. Paul's human rights director, Tyrone Terrill, asked that the decorations be removed, saying they could be offensive to non-Christians. That has upset City Council member Dave Thune. It has also distressed the Catholic League. Its director, Bill Donohue, issued a rather sardonic release protesting the action.

California Agency Refuses To Fund Historical Mission Repair

Yesterday's Modesto Bee reports that the California Culture and Historical Endowment has refused a funding request by the Friends of Mission San Miguel, citing a Feb. 23 Advisory Letter received from the California Attorney General's Office that the funding would violate California's constitution. The decision disappointed the California Missions Foundation, which has launched a $50 million campaign to help restore and preserve the state's 21 historic missions, 18 of which still are used for religious services. The Foundation had hoped that money from Proposition 40, passed in 2002 to help fund parks and cultural and historic restorations, could be used to repair the earthquake-damaged Mission San Miguel. However the 208-year old Mission is owned by the Catholic Church, and California's Constitution, Art. XVI, Sec. 5, prohibits the grant of anything in aid of any sectarian purpose and prohibits help to "support or sustain" a sectarian institution. Also California Constsitution, Art. I, Sec. 4, prohibits governmental preference of one religion over another. (See earlier related posting.)

University of Wisconsin Settles Suit On Dormitory Bible Studies

The University of Wisconsin yesterday agreed to settle a suit challenging a ban on resident assistants holding Bible study sessions in their dormitories. The settlement was announced by the Alliance Defense Fund that had filed the suit on behalf of RA Lance Steiger. The Consent Order says that the University has implemented a new policy as of March 10, 2006, that allows Resident Assistants to participate in, organize, and lead any meetings or other activities (including Bible Studies), in their rooms, floors or residence halls, or anywhere else on campus, to the same extent as other students. The University agreed to pay plaintiff Steiger nominal damages of $1 as well as attorneys' fees and costs of $2500. (See prior posting.)

Indonesia To Adopt New Decree On Houses of Worship

In Indonesia, the government is ready to promulgate a new ministerial decree on houses of worship, according to today's Jakarta Post. This will replace a 1969 decree that required allowed the local populace to veto a new congregation. That meant that Christians in predominantly Muslim areas often had difficulty getting approval to build churches. Under the new decree, local governments can no longer escape their obligation to provide houses of worship for religious minorities. New places of worship must have congregations of at least 90, and at least 60 people of other faiths living in the area must consent. The congregation must also obtain a building permit from the local administration and the Communication Forum for Religious Harmony (FKUB). However, unlike in the previous decree, if locals object but consent is granted by the administration and the FKUB, local bodies are required to find an alternate space for the church. Christians remain dissatisfied with the new decree, seeking lower threshold numbers for congregants and local resident approval. 42 mostly Christian legislators in the House of Representatives have filed a petition to reject the new decree.

Study On Attitudes Toward Atheists In US

UMN News reports that three University of Minnesota sociology faculty have authored a study on public attitudes toward atheists, to be published in the April issue of the American Sociological Review. They find that Americans rate atheists below Muslims, recent immigrants, gays and lesbians and other minority groups in "sharing their vision of American society." Atheists are also the minority group most Americans are least willing to allow their children to marry. Many of the study’s telephone respondents associated atheism with evils ranging from criminal behavior to rampant materialism and cultural elitism. Reacting to the study, Ellen Johnson, President of American Atheists, said that one reason for the findings is the unconstitutional promotion of religion by government and political leaders. [Thanks to Nick Gillard-Byers and Larry Mundinger for the leads.]

Secy. Hughes Speaks At Conference On Faith and Service

Wednesday, Karen Hughes, U.S. Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, spoke (full text) in Washington at the first International Conference on Faith and Service. Here are some excerpts:

[S]ome might question why a government official, especially one from a nation that prides itself on the separation of church and state, would be asked to speak at a conference on interfaith dialogue.... Why would a government -- a United States Government official convene a meeting of religious leaders? And the answer is both simple and profound. It's because faith plays such a critical role in the lives of so many people across our world. Governments would be foolish to ignore its power and impact or to leave the floor only to those who seek to use religion as a force to divide or destroy....

Voices from our diverse faith communities, such as those represented here today, are often the most credible voices to say that terror and violence are not a matter of religion at all. When you think about it in its starkest terms, urging young people to strap bombs on their bodies, to kill themselves, and in the process try to kill as many other innocents as possible, is not a legitimate tenet of any faith....

Promoting religious freedom is a central element of the President's agenda for democracy and freedom across our world.... We must not rest in this effort, nor ever forget those who are persecuted for their beliefs and denied the rights of conscience that we sometimes take for granted here in the United States.

Afghan Charge Against Muslim Convert Draws U.S. Criticism

The possibility that a Muslim convert to Christianity in Afghanistan might be sentenced to death by Afghan courts has led to widespread protests in the West and a defensive reaction from Afghan officials. In a speech yesterday in Wheeling, West Virginia, (full text) President George W. Bush said of Afghanistan:

We expect them to honor the universal principle of freedom. I'm troubled when I hear -- deeply troubled when I hear the fact that a person who has converted away from Islam may be held to account. That's not the universal application of the values that I talked about. Look forward to working with the government of that country to make sure that people are protected in their capacity to worship.

Later, in answer to a question, the President said: "It is deeply troubling that a country we helped liberate would hold a person to account because they chose a particular religion over another.... [W]e can solve this problem by working closely with the government that we've got contacts with -- and will. We'll deal with this issue diplomatically and remind people that there is something as universal as being able to choose religion."

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper called President Karzai yesterday to express deep concern, according to the Ottawa Star.

The Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) also issued an unusually strong statement on the matter:

Religious decisions should be matters of personal choice, not a cause for state intervention. Faith imposed by force is not true belief, but coercion. Islam has no need to compel belief in its divine truth.... We urge the government of Afghanistan to order the immediate release of Mr. Abdul Rahman.

Afghanistan responded by saying that the matter would be handled by its courts. Reuters yesterday reported that Mahaiuddin Baluch, a religious affairs advisor to President Hamid Karzai, said: "We in Afghanistan have the prosecutor who observes the law and the court that executes it. Whatever the court orders will be executed as the court is independent."

ISN Security Watch today has an excellent analysis of the constitutional issues and political pressures inside Afghanistan. (See prior related postings, 1, 2.)

Supreme Court Arguments Yesterday In Procedural Prisoner Free Exercise Case

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in Woodford v. Ngo, a case involving procedural questions, but growing out of the alleged denial of religious rights to a California prisoner. As described by the Associated Press, Ngo was punished for alleged inappropriate activity with volunteer priests. He was barred from Bible study and from corresponding with a Catholic chapel volunteer after the alleged incidents at San Quentin State Prison in 2000. Ngo filed a grievance with prison officials, but it was denied because he missed the 15-day deadline for grievances allowed by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. Ngo then sued in federal court claiming a violation of his First Amendment right to free exercise of religion, and alleging that prison officials defamed him by saying he engaged in sexual relations with volunteer Catholic priests.

At issue before the Supreme Court was whether inmates should be able to file federal lawsuits even if they miss state filing deadlines. Ngo's attorney, Meier Feder, argued that Congress never intended to block valid inmate complaints in passing the 1996 Prison Litigation Reform Act. Attorneys for California and for the Bush administration argued that in enacting 42 USC Sec. 1997e, Congress wanted inmates to comply with state prison grievance procedures, including deadlines. Northwestern University has a further summary of the case, along with links to the 9th Circuit's opinion below and to the briefs filed in the Supreme Court.

2nd Circuit Holds Asylum Applicant Need Not Have Religious Knowledge

In Rizal v. Gonzales, (2nd Cir., March 21, 2006), the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals reversed an immigration judge's denial of asylum to an Indonesian citizen who claimed that he would be persecuted in Indonesia because of his Christian beliefs. The Washington Post today reports on the case. Rizal's asylum claim had been rejected because he incorrectly answered a number of questions about Christianity. He said Jesus was crucified in Bethlehem, not Jerusalem, and he did not know which disciples wrote the New Testament. Asked who prepared the Ten Commandments, Rizal answered Jesus instead of Moses. But the Court of Appeals said that people who identify with a religion but lack detailed knowledge about it can still be persecuted for their religious affiliation.

Georgia House Permits Bible As Textbook In High School

The Macon Telegraph reports that yesterday the Georgia House of Representatives passed by a vote of 151-7 a bill (HB 1133) permitting high schools to offer elective courses on the history and literature of the Old Testament and New Testament eras. The classes would focus on the law, morals, values and culture of the eras. Interestingly, the bill provides that the Old Testament and New Testament would be the primary text for each class and the local school board would decide which version of each text to use. Students would also have the option to use a different version.

The bill was originally introduced by Democrats in the Georgia Senate. Republicans, upping the ante, quickly substituted their own version, specifying that the Bible itself would be the course textbook. The measure easily passed the GOP-controlled Senate last month by a 50-1 vote. House lawmakers changed the Senate bill by taking out requirements that the New Testament courses must document the parables of Jesus and the travels of Paul. These changes now must be approved by the Senate. [Thanks to Jean Dudley via Religion law for the information.]

Meanwhile, the Auburn Plainsman today reports that the Alabama Senate Education Committee recently cleared SB472, a Democratic-sponsored bill that would permit the Bible to be taught as literature in public schools. A different version of the bill (HB58) is pending in the House. It is opposed by Republicans because it prescribes The Bible and Its Influence as the required text. (See prior posting.)

UPDATE: On March 27, the Georgia Senate also approved HB 1133, and Gov. Sonny Perdue is expected to sign the law, according to the New York Times.

Church Contributes Funds For Investors In SEC Suit

The Securities and Exchange Commission last week announced a settlement in a securities fraud case filed in Massachusetts involving a unique cooperative effort between a church and government enforcement authorities. In 2001, Eric Resteiner sold $22 million in fictitious securities, defrauding at least 50 investors, many of whom were members of the Christian Science Church. In earlier litigation, the SEC obtained disgorgement of $700,000 from one of Resteiner's co-defendants. Under the securities laws, this will be used to partially compensate Resteiner's victims. Now, the First Church of Christ Scientist in Boston has agreed to donate an additional $2.3 million to the disgorgement fund so that victims can be more adequately compensated. Section 308(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act permits the SEC to accept gifts to a disgorgement fund for eventual distribution to defrauded investors. This is the first time that such a donation has been made since the enactment of Sarbanes-Oxley in 2002.

Background On Pending Satmar Litigation

Yesterday's New York Sun carries a long and fascinating article detailing the intricacies of litigation ongoing for 5 years in Brooklyn over control of the vast holdings of the Orthodox Jewish Satmar community. The dispute, now in a state appellate court, involves rival factions-- each following a different son of the Satmar's grand rebbe. Each faction claims to have elected a president of the Satmar's Williamsburg congregation. The board has the power to manage the Satmar's assets. The congregation's bylaws are written in Yiddish, and one of the 26 buildings in dispute is the partially built skeleton of a 10,000-seat Brooklyn synagogue. New York Judge Melvin Barasch, who heard the case at trial, decided in 2004 that because the dispute raised the question about congregational membership, it was essentially a religious dispute and was not a matter for a New York courts to decide. "What civil court is capable or would want to evaluate whether a person is sufficiently observant of Satmar religious doctrine to qualify as a member?" said Scott Mollen, who represents followers of one of the sons, Rabbi Zalmen. (See prior related postings, 1, 2.)

British House of Lords Upholds School Policy Banning Jilbab

In a widely followed case, R (on the Application of Begum) v. Headteacher and Governors of Denbigh High School, a unanimous 5-judge panel of the British House of Lords today overturned a lower court ruling and held that Art. 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights was not violated when student Shabina Begum was banned from wearing a traditional Islamic jilbab at school. Similarly, it held that her right to education under Article 2 of the First Protocol to the Convention was not infringed.

Denbigh High School had a uniform policy that allowed Begum to wear the shalwar kameez (trousers and tunic), but not a jilbab that covered her entire body. (See prior posting.) Today's Education Guardian reports that Lord Bingham's opinion emphasized that courts, lacking the experience, background and detailed knowledge of the headteacher, staff and governors, should not interfere in the school's decision. He pointed out that the school's policy was acceptable to mainstream Muslim opinion.

Shabina's counsel, Cherie Booth QC, said that the kameez was no longer suitable for Begum because she had reached sexual maturity and it did not sufficiently protect her modesty. Lord Bingham said any sincere religious belief such as that held by Shabina must command respect, but the issue was whether her freedom to manifest her belief by her dress was subject to limitation and whether that limitation was justified. He said Shabina could have attended another school, where the jilbab was permitted. He was satisfied there was no interference with her right to manifest her belief, and even if there was interference, it was a "proportionate" response by the school.

Agreeing, Lord Hoffmann said that Article 9 of the European Convention "does not require that one should be allowed to manifest one's religion at any time and place of one's own choosing." Shabina's family had chosen that school with knowledge of its uniform requirements.

Begum said she would be discussing with her lawyers whether they would appeal the case
to the European Court of Human Rights.

Afghan Who Converted May Be Mentally Unfit To Stand Trial

In Kabul, Afghanistan today, according to the Guardian Unlimited, a state prosecutor said that Abdul Rahman, facing a possible death penalty for converting from Islam to Christianity, may be mentally unfit to stand trial. (See prior posting.) The case has attracted widespread international attention. The United States, Britain and other countries that have troops in Afghanistan have raised concern about Rahman's fate. A Western diplomat in Kabul and a human rights advocate both said the government was desperately searching for a way to drop the case because of the reaction it has caused. Afghanistan's constitution provides that "no law can be contrary to the beliefs and provisions of the sacred religion of Islam."

Additional Group To Recruit Jewish Military Chaplains

The Jewish Welfare Board's Jewish Chaplains Council-- an organization that works with all streams of Judaism-- is about to lose its monopoly on endorsing chaplains for the U.S. military. Only 29 of the military's 2850 chaplains are rabbis. The Forward reports that the Aleph Institute, an organization known for helping Jewish prisoners, was approved last month by the Department of Defense as an additional body that can recruit rabbis for the chaplains' corps. Aleph is affiliated with the ultra-Orthodox Chabad-Lubavitch movement. Currently Chabad rabbis generally are unable to become chaplains because of the military's ban on wearing of beards. It is expected that Aleph will work to change the military's grooming rule. In the meantime, it is likely to reach out to rabbis in other parts of the Orthodox movement.

Are Islamist Enclaves Constitutional?

The Spring 2006 issue of The Middle East Quarterly carries an article by David Kennedy Houck, titled The Islamist Challenge to the U.S. Constitution. He focuses particularly on a proposal by a Little Rock, Arkansas Muslim group to create an internal Islamic enclave. Here are a few excerpts from his much longer article:

While the U.S. Constitution enshrines the right to religious freedom and the prohibition against a state religion, when it comes to the rights of religious enclaves to impose communal rules, the dividing line is more nebulous. Can U.S. enclaves, homeowner associations, and other groups enforce Islamic law?...

On their face, the fundamental principles of the internal Muslim enclave are no more invidious than any other religious enclave. But ideology matters. Many proponents of an Islamic polity promote an ideology at odds with U.S. constitutional jurisprudence and the prohibition against the establishment of a state-sponsored religion. The refusal to recognize federal law makes Islamist enclaves more akin to Ruby Ridge than to the Hasidic and Amish [communities]....

Prince Charles Gets Honorary Degree, Speaks At Al-Azhar University

Prince Charles on Tuesday, according to the Washington Post, was awarded an honorary degree by Al-Azhar University in Cairo, the foremost Islamic institution in the Sunni Muslim world. He was accompanied on his visit to Egypt by his wife, Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall, who wore a headscarf as she toured the mosque at Al-Azhar. Charles' speech at the University criticized Islamophobia in Europe, including the cartoons that appeared in Danish and other newspapers. He also criticized restrictions on Christians imposed by some Muslim nations. In Egypt, the large Coptic Christian community complains of restrictions on building churches and of discrimination in employment.

USDA Finds Violations At Kosher Slaughtering Plant

Last week, the Forward reported on the release by the U.S. Department of Agriculture of its Inspector General's April 25, 2005 Report (full text) on AgriProcessors, a large kosher slaughterhouse in Postville, Iowa. The report questioned certain methods used by AgriProcessors, calling them "inhumane slaughter" techniques. The company has since changed the questionable procedures. The USDA's investigation of AgriProcessors began after People For the Ethical Treatment of Animals, a vegetarian group, released an undercover video of animals being slaughtered in the plant. A lawyer who represents AgriProcessors, Nathan Lewin, said the report makes it clear that everything done at the plant was approved by the Agriculture Department until PETA released its video. The video and all relevant documents are available on the PETA Undercover website. The USDA report also faulted government inspectors who ignored the violations, accepted gifts of meat from the plant, and played video games instead of carrying out their inspections, according to a report in Jewish Week.

Texas School Sued Over Bible Group's Access To Website

The Liberty Legal Institute yesterday filed suit in federal district court against Plano, Texas school officials on behalf of Students Witnessing Absolute Truth, a Bible-study group. Today's Fort Worth Star-Telegram reports that the group was not permitted to post an organizational description in the "Campus Programs" section for their school on the Plano Independent School District's website. In its announcement of the litigation, Liberty Legal Institute said: "The website page is specifically designated as a listing of all student groups offered within the school. By banning only the religious group, Plano ISD is in direct violation of the First Amendment and The Equal Access Act." An earlier suit by Liberty Legal, challenging the school district's refusal to permit a student to distribute religious-themed candy-canes, is in litigation in the same court.

Church-State Tidbits From Bush Q&A In Cleveland

Yesterday, at the City Club of Cleveland, President George W. Bush spoke on The War On Terror and Operation Iraqi Freedom (full text). The Q&A following his talk produced two interesting colloquies involving church-state:

Q [A]uthor and former Nixon administration official Kevin Phillips, in his latest book, American Theocracy, discusses what has been called radical Christianity and its growing involvement into government and politics. He makes the point that members of your administration have reached out to prophetic Christians who see the war in Iraq and the rise of terrorism as signs of the apocalypse. Do you believe this, that the war in Iraq and the rise of terrorism are signs of the apocalypse? And if not, why not?

THE PRESIDENT: The answer is -- I haven't really thought of it that way. (Laughter.) Here's how I think of it. The first I've heard of that, by the way. I guess I'm more of a practical fellow. I vowed after September that I would do everything I could to protect the American people....*** I take a practical view of doing the job you want me to do -- which is how do we defeat an enemy that still wants to hurt us; and how do we deal with threats before they fully materialize; what do we do to protect us from harm? That's my job. And that job came home on September the 11th, for me -- loud and clear.....

Then, as part of a long answer to a question asking about domestic policy aimed at helping unsafe and poverty-stricken neighborhoods, the President promoted his faith-based initiative:

I believe that the idea of empowering our faith-based institutions -- government can help, but government sometimes can't find -- well, it just doesn't pass -- it's not a loving organization. And so I believe strongly -- I believe strongly in empowering faith-based and community-based programs all throughout America to help achieve certain objectives.

Mentoring, for example, mentoring of children in prisoners -- whose mother or dad may be in prison is an initiative I started. Drug rehabilitation, giving those who are eligible for drug money a voucher, money themselves, a scrip so they can redeem it at a program that they choose, not that the government assigns them to. In other words, there's a variety of social service programs aimed at lifting people up.

Nuns and Priests May Be Lawyers In India

In India today, the High Court of Kerala affirmed the decision of a lower court and held that nuns and priests are not barred from practicing law. The Bar Council of India had filed an appeal challenging the lower court's decision. According to Rediff.com, the appeals court held that "professing religion" by itself was not enough to reject an application for admission to the bar.

Pennsylvania Pastors Network Nears Line On Tax Code Limits

The new determination of the Internal Revenue Service to enforce the tax code's restrictions on non-profit organizations is about to be tested in Pennsylvania. Today's New York Times reports that the Pennsylvania Pastors Network is holding training sessions to teach clergy how to get their parishioners out to vote in the November election. Hosted by Colin A. Hanna, founder of the conservative advocacy group Let Freedom Ring, the first training session featured a seven-minute videotaped message from , Sen. Rick Santorum who faces a difficult re-election fight. He encouraged the pastors to support a proposed constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage. The tax code permits non-profits to register voters and to express views on public issues, but they may not support a particular political party or candidate. Inviting just one candidate to speak, singling out one candidate's accomplishments and highlighting a combination of issues tailored to one candidate's campaign are all factors that the I.R.S. considers in determining whether a non-profit has engaged in prohibited partisan activity.

Mother Theresa Statue Controversial In Northern Albania

In Albania, the Culture Ministry has proposed erecting a statue of Mother Theresa, an ethnic Albanian, in the northern city of Shkodra, according to yesterday's Washington Post. Mother Theresa is widely admired in Albania, and she has been honored in the capital city of Tirana by having an airport and hospital named after her and an annex at the National Museum devoted to her works. However, on Sunday, representatives of the Charity Islamic Association, Islamic Intellectuals and Albanian Muslim Forum opposed the bust, saying the statue was a provocation. They said a cross in a nearby area was vandalized in January. However, the next day, Selim Muca, head of the Albanian Muslim Community, the organization representing all Muslims in Albania, said those objections from small Muslim groups were not the community's official position.

Lawyer Criticizes Ontario's Ban On Religious Arbitration Panels

An interesting article titled Faith Based Arbitrations In Ontario: A Lost Opportunity has been posted by Canadian lawyer Faisal Kutty. It criticizes Ontario's decision last month to preclude the use of religious laws in resolving family disputes under the province's Arbitration Act. Kutty says that misunderstanding, ignorance, and careless pronouncements, as well as inaccurate media coverage, led to the Family Statute Law Amendment Act, 2005. The FSLAA goes against the recommendations in the Boyd Report, a study commissioned by the Ontario government. Kutty argues that Ontario lost an opportunity to show the world how to balance the rights of a religious community with those of potentially vulnerable individuals, and to demonstrate how Islamic law and liberal democracy could co-exist. He fears that "back alley" arbitrations will continue in Ontario, but now without any regulation or supervision.

An earlier article by Kutty discussed the recommendations made by the 2004 Boyd Report that called for retaining religious-based arbitration, but imposing new regulation on arbitration tribunals and the family law arbitration process.

Indonesia Increasingly Convicts For Deviating From Islam

Today's Los Angeles Times carries a story on the increasing prosecution in Indonesia of those who deviate from accepted Muslim teachings. Article 28E of Indonesia's Constitution guarantees the right to practice one's religion and freely express one's beliefs. However blasphemy and insulting religion are both crimes under Indonesian law. Courts are increasingly convicting for one of these offenses when individuals violate a fatwa (ruling) by the Muslim Council of Ulemas. For example, Yusman Roy, a former boxer and a convert to Islam, is serving two years in prison for distributing a video of a bilingual prayer session he holds at his East Java boarding school. Conservative Muslims believe true prayer can be conducted only in Arabic. In August, a court acquitted Roy of deviating from Islam, but found him guilty of inciting hatred by challenging the views of local clerics.

Sumardi Tappaya, a high school religious teacher, is awaiting trial for blasphemy after a relative claimed he was whistling while he prayed. Ardhi Husain and his editors were sentenced to five years in prison for writing a book that the ulemas said contained 70 errors, such as claiming Muhammad was not the last prophet and that non-Muslims could go to heaven. And Lia Aminuddin, who claims to be the Virgin Mary and leads the quasi-Islamic God's Kingdom of Eden cult, was arrested in December for blasphemy after thousands of protesters surrounded her headquarters in Jakarta.

Fallout From Muhammad Cartoons Continues

Legal fallout continues in the Muhammad cartoon controversy. Jurist and AFP report that a group of 27 Danish Muslim organizations plans to bring suit in a Danish court against Jyllands-Posten, the paper that originally published the offending cartoons. This follows the refusal by the Danish prosecutor to file charges against the paper. The Muslim group also plan to file a complaint against Jyllands-Posten with the U.N. Commission on Human Rights. Ahmad Akkari, a Danish Imam, claimed that Denmark's failure to proceed against the paper violated the country's obligations under U.N. human rights conventions. [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for this lead.]

The United Nations Commission on Human Rights’ Special Rapporteur examining the situation has strongly criticized Denmark, according to a report yesterday in the Turkish paper, Zaman.

Meanwhile, in France, a draft law criminalizing blasphemy, has been proposed by an MP for the ruling Union for Popular Movement party (UMP). According to Friday's Islam Online, MP Marc Bouraud said he was driven by the Danish cartoons crisis, which "exposed the fragile link between freedom of expression and freedom of belief and thought."

New Prisoner Cases On Attendance At Religious Services

In Walee v. Crosby, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10633 (MD Fla., March 16, 2006), a federal district court rejected a prisoner's complaint that his free exercise rights were violated when the prison's computer system was not able to list his religious name along with his commitment name on the list of inmates who have been cleared to attend religious services.

In Joseph v. Lewis, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10653 (ED Cal., March 15, 2006), a California federal district court found that a prisoner had a valid free exercise complaint growing out of prison authorities' refusal to permit him to leave a vocational instruction class to attend Friday Jumu'ah prayer services. However his claim that his inmate grievance form was improperly processed was dismissed.

Austria Moves Toward Greater Recognition of Muslims

Yesterday, Islam Online reported that a proposed new law in Austria would give Muslims more rights than they currently have. The bill would set up a college to graduate imams. It would permit Muslim chaplains and Muslim congregational prayer in the army. Muslim chaplains would similarly be permitted in the police force and in hospitals. The proposal would also call for respect for the dress code of Muslim women and criminalize verbal and body attacks against them.

In another development, the Catholic Church in the Upper Austria region has decided to allow the teaching of Islam in one of its 55 schools, as the number of Muslim students enrolled increases. Other Catholic schools were expected to do the same, since the education law calls for such classes once the number of Muslim students reaches 3.

Hindu Group Sues Over California Textbook Changes

On Friday, a week after the California State Board of Education approved changes in the way textbooks treat Hinduism, the Hindu American Foundation filed suit challenging the fairness of the hearing conducted by the Board on the changes. Rediff.com reports on the suit filed in California Superior Court in Sacramento. The HAF complaint alleges that the SBE violated the law when it approved textbooks for sixth grade history-social science that tend to "demean, stereotype, and reflect adversely" upon Hindus, portray Hinduism as undesirable and hold Hindu beliefs and practices up to ridicule or as inferior. However, other Hindu groups praise the action of the Board, saying it assures historically accurate accounts of Indian history. The full text of the complaint and related exhibits is available online.

Afghan Judge Threatens Death Sentence For Conversion To Christianity

Today's Melbourne Herald Sun reports that a court in Afghanistan has told a man that he could face the death penalty for converting from Islam to Christianity. Supreme Court judge Ansarullah Mawlavizada said the suspect, Abdur Rahman, who was arrested after members of his family informed police of his conversion, would be charged with abandoning Islam. Sharia law calls for the death sentence for Muslims who abandon their religion. Article 3 of Afghanistan's 2004 Constitution provides that "no law can be contrary to the beliefs and provisions of the sacred religion of Islam."

UPDATE: The United States on Monday said that it was closely monitoring Rahman's trial, and urged Afghan authorities to deal with the case transparently and according to the rule of law.

Church Member's Suit Dismissed As Ecclesiastical Matter

In Wolter v. Delgatto, (TX App-14, March 16, 2006), a Texas state court of appeals held that under the First Amendment, state courts lacked jurisdiction over a suit by a former church member challenging Heights Presbyterian Church's involvement in a low-income senior housing project. The court held that ultimately the suit was over how and when, under the Presbyterian Book of Order, the church may spend its resources, and that question is ecclesiastical in nature.

Phillips' New Book-- "American Theocracy"

Kevin Phillips new book, American Theocracy: The Peril and Politics of Radical Religion, Oil, and Borrowed Money in the 21st Century (Viking, 2006) is reviewed in Saturday's New York Times, and is featured again in today's New York Times Book Review section.

Immigration Proposal Threatens Religious Social Services

Today's San Antonio (TX) Express-News carries a long article on the dilemmas that will be faced by religious social service organizations if the immigration reform bill pending in Congress is enacted. A part of House of Representatives' proposed legislation would make it a crime for any individual or group to knowingly assist an undocumented alien. Supporting that provision, Texas Rep. John Culberson says, "If a person is here illegally, then they're violating the law. How can anyone or any group be exempt from obeying the laws of the United States?" However, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish and Islamic, religious leaders all say that critical social services to the undocumented potentially could be reduced --if not stopped -- if that part of the bill becomes law. A number of members of the Senate are hopeful that the final version of the law will permit legitimate relief work to continue.

UPDATE: Sunday's New York Times adds another dimension to this story in an article titled Rift on Immigration Widens for Conservatives and Cardinals. It focuses on the Catholic Church's opposition to tightening of restrictions on undocumented aliens.

Lutheran School Seeks Dismissal of Sexual Orientation Bias Claim

Defense attorneys have moved to dismiss a widely publicized suit against the California Lutheran High School Association and Cal Lutheran High School in Wildomar, California, according to last Wednesday's North Coast Times. The suit brought by two students and their parents claimed that the school violated California's Unruh Civil Rights Act when it expelled the two students who were suspected of having a lesbian relationship. (See prior posting.) Defense attorneys argue that the school merely expelled two students who violated the school's Christian Code of Conduct. They claim that the Unruh Civil Rights Act that covers businesses should not apply to a nonprofit religious school. A provision in Sec. 220 of California's Education Code excludes religious schools from coverage of the anti-discrimination provision that applies explicitly to schools when its requirement would be inconsistent with the school's religious tenets. Defendants also argue that applying the law to the school would violate its associational rights, and that ordering the school to suppress its religious beliefs in admitting students would violate the Establishment Clause.

Suit Claims University's GLBT Program Violates Establishment Clause

Earlier this week, the Alliance Defense Fund announced that it has filed suit in federal court on behalf of two students against the Georgia Institute of Technology. The suit alleges that through a program called "Safe Space", the university promotes beliefs of religions that favor homosexual behavior and denigrates religions that oppose such behavior. The suit alleges that this violates the Establishment Clause. The suit also challenges the school's speech code and activity fee policy. The university claims that Safe Space is designed to dispel negative stereotypes and publicize support resources available to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered students. The full text of the complaint in Sklar v. Clough, filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, is available online.

6th Circuit Upholds Pro-Life License Plates

Yesterday, in ACLU of Tennessee v. Bredesen (6th Cir., March 17, 2006), the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in a 2-1 decision rejected a free expression challenge to Tennessee's sale of specialty license plates bearing the inscription "Choose Life". Individuals are not required to purchase this version of the plates. The majority held that the pro-life message was government speech not subject to requirements of viewpoint neutrality. The Louisville Courier-Journal today assessed reaction to the decision. The decision did not deal with the question of whether license plates carrying explicitly religious symbols-- like that proposed recently in Tennessee-- would violate the Establishment Clause.

More On Governor's Bill To Exempt Boston's Catholic Charities

The Blue Mass. Group blog yesterday made available the full text of Gov. Mitt Romney's proposed legislation to exempt Boston's Catholic Charities from the requirement to provide adoption services for gay and lesbian parents. [See prior posting.] It also sets out a close analysis of the language of the proposed law, arguing that it will not in fact accomplish the purpose that the Governor seeks.

Here is one of its arguments. The bill provides that "it shall be lawful for any [religiously sponsored social service agency] to take any action with respect to the provision of adoption or foster placement services which is calculated by such organization to promote its religious principles..." The analysis argues that while placing a child with a gay couple might violate Catholic principles, not placing a child with a gay couple would not "promote its religious principles".

U.N. Committee Censures U.S. Policy Toward Shoshone Indians

Last week (March 10, 2006), the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination ("CERD") issued an ''Early Warning and Urgent Action Procedure'' (full text) strongly criticizing United States policy toward the Western Shoshone Indian tribe. The federal government, which claims that the Shoshone's lands became public lands after the tribe's title was extinguished, interferes with the tribe's using various ancestral lands for religious and cultural activities. The government says that the Shoshone tribe has twice approved a settlement with the government. The action by the U.N. body has been covered in articles in the Salt Lake Tribune, Indian Country Today, and Spero News.

Four New Prisoner Cases

Several prisoner free exercise decisions have recently become available:

In Asad v. Bush, (11th Cir., March 14, 2006), the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a state prisoner's free exercise and RLUIPA claims growing out of disciplinary action taken against the prisoner after a dispute over whether Muslim services were being held at the proper time. It found that prison authorities offered an acceptable alternative when inmates were permitted to conduct prayers individually at the requested time.

In Wolf v. Sheriff, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10009 (D. Ark., Jan. 30, 2006), an Arkansas federal district judge accepted the earlier recommendation of a Magistrate Judge (2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40978 (Sept. 8, 2005)), that the religious rights of a Native American prisoners were infringed when the state prison authorities denied them access to a prayer feather. However, disagreeing with the Magistrate, the court found that defendants were entitled to the defense of qualified immunity as to damage claims against them.

In Iron Thunderhorse v. Pierce, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9997 (ED Tex., Feb. 13, 2006), a Texas federal district court dismissed several constitutional claims by a Native American prisoner held in a Texas prison who claimed that existing Native American religious programs give preferential treatment to "Christian-oriented" Native American beliefs while disfavoring traditional ceremonial leaders known as shamans. His claims included ones for confiscation and denial of religious items; the lack of a program for shamans; denial of a racial category for "Native Americans"; failure to provide exemptions or accommodations for the dress code and grooming code; failure to allow equal access to services for inmates in segregation; and failure to honor prior agreements which he entered into with prison officials.

In Ragland v. Angelone, (WD Va., March 14, 2006), and a follow-up memorandum opinion issued on the next day, a Virginia federal district court rejected a claim under RLUIPA brought by a Rastafarian prisoner challenging a Virginia prison's grooming rules. The prisoner had refused to cut his hair and beard for religious reasons.

House Hearings on International Human Rights

Yesterday, the Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights and International Operations, of the U.S. House International Relations Committee held hearings on "Monitoring Respect for Human Rights Around the World: A Review of the Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2005". (A webcast of the hearings, as well as selected transcripts, is available online- scroll to March 16, 2006.) Among those testifying specifically about issues of religious freedom were Catholic Bishop Thomas Wenski, Nina Shea (Director of Center for Religious Freedom), and Serbian Orthodox Bishop Kyr Teodosije. (See prior related posting.)

In a related matter, the House on Wednesday passed H.Con. Res. 190 expressing the sense of the Congress that the Russian Federation should fully protect the freedoms of all religious communities without distinction, whether registered and unregistered, as stipulated by the Russian Constitution and international standards. Text of the debate and passage are available online.

Is Polygamy The Next Constitutional Battle?

Today's Town Hall carries an article titled Polygamy Is 'Next Civil Rights Battle,' Activists Say. The article quotes Mark Henkel, founder of the Organization for Christian Polygamy who argues that polygamy is found in the Bible and throughout history. He calls the present concept of marriage "marital Marxism", produced in the Middle Ages by the Catholic Church. The argument that bans on polygamy are unconstitutional is based primarily on the 2003 U.S. Supreme Court case of Lawrence v. Texas which struck down prohibitions on homosexual sodomy. The focus on decriminalizing polygamy has intensified as HBO this week launched a new series, "Big Love", about a Utah polygamist and his three wives living in a comfortable suburban community. The Salt Lake Tribune has reported about the show and its impact.

Catholic On Alberta School Board Seeks To Retain Position

In Canada, this week's Western Catholic Reporter details an interesting complaint filed with the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission by the Chinook's Edge School Division. Roy Brassard has been chair of Chinook's Edge School Division for the past eight years. Last year, Catholic voters in Didsbury voted to join the Red Deer Catholic School Division, which is inside the boundaries of the Chinook's Edge public school system. Alberta approved the change in June. Under Alberta's School Act, this now disqualifies Brassard from continuing to serve on the board of the public school system. Under the School Act, all Catholics within the Catholic School Division are treated as residents of that district. While they are still permitted to send their children to the public school and to be employed by the public school system, they are disqualified from serving on the public school board of trustees. However, Brassard thinks the law needs changing, arguing that "parents of Catholic students who stay in the Chinook's Edge school system will not have the opportunity to represent their children as trustees." The complaint filed with the Human Rights commission was seen as an act of last resort to try to allow Brassard to retain his position.

Mass. Governor Proposes Exemption For Catholic Charities Adoption Services

Following an announcement last week by the Catholic Charities of Boston that it would no longer offer adoption services, Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney formally proposed a bill Wednesday that would exempt Catholic Charities from a state anti-discrimination law that currently requires the organization to provide adoption services to gay and lesbian couples. (See prior posting.) Reporting on the Governor's bill, the Boston Globe Wednesday quoted Romney's letter to state legislative leaders: "It is a matter beyond dispute, and a prerequisite to the preservation of liberty, that government not dictate to religious institutions the moral principles by which they are to carry out their charitable and divine mission." [Thanks to Blog From the Capital for the lead.]

In response, the Jewish Alliance for Law and Social Action (JALSA) and the Massachusetts chapter of Americans United for Separation of Church and State yesterday issued a release arguing that the proposed exemption for Catholic Charities would be unconstitutional. They said, "The First Amendment's free exercise clause grants us all the right to hold whatever beliefs we choose, and to act in accordance with them in our private affairs. It does not, however, permit any individual or institution to engage in bigotry in the discharge of a public or governmentally regulated function."

Oregon Court Demands More Religious Accommodation In School Basketball Schedule

In Nakashima v. Board of Education (Ore. Ct. App., March 15, 2006), an Oregon state appellate court gave an initial victory to a Seventh Day Adventist school in its suit against the Oregon Board of Education in the Adventist school's attempt to get the dates of the state basketball tournament rescheduled so games would not be held on Friday night or Saturday, the Adventist players' Sabbath. The student basketball players filed suit under Oregon's statute banning religious discrimination in schools. The Oregon School Activities Association said that accommodating the school's request would amount to an "undue hardship" and therefore was not required by law. The Court of Appeals held that accommodation under Oregon's law required more than the federal civil rights law does. Federal law excuses accommodation if it imposes more than a de minimus burden. Under Oregon law, accommodation is required unless it "requires significant difficulty or expense". The School Activities Association was ordered to apply this test to the students' rescheduling request.

Suit Against UC Berkeley Evolution Website Dismissed

The UC Berkeley News reports that last Monday, a San Francisco federal district court dismissed a suit that had been brought by a Santa Rosa couple who claimed that a University of California, Berkeley, website titled "Understanding Evolution" was used to promote religion. (See prior posting.) Without reaching the merits, the court held that plaintiffs lacked standing to bring the suit. The suit also named an administrator at the National Science Foundation, which partially funded the website, as a defendant. The judge has not yet ruled on the NSF's motion to dismiss the suit against it.

UPDATE: The full opinion in the case is now available on LEXIS: Caldwell v. Caldwell, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13688 (ND Cal., March 13, 2006).

U.N. Creates New Human Rights Council

With the United States nearly alone in its opposition, the United Nations General Assembly yesterday approved the creation of a new Human Rights Council to replace the discredited U.N. Commission on Human Rights. Yesterday the New York Times reported that by a vote of 170-4 with 3 abstentions, the General Assembly passed the resolution that calls for the election of new Council members on May 9, 2006 and a first meeting of the Council on June 19. Joining the U.S. in voting against the resolution were Israel, the Marshall Islands and Palau. Abstaining were Belarus, Iran and Venezuela. The U.S. has objected to the resolution because it does not go far enough in guaranteeing that countries notorious for their human rights abuses will be kept off the new Council. The U.S. wanted a requirement that Council members be elected only by a 2/3 vote in the General Assembly. (See prior posting.) Nevertheless, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, said the U.S. would work cooperatively to strengthen the Council. He said whether the U.S. would be a candidate for membership on the Council is still under discussion.

School Board To Permit Distribution of Gideon Bibles

The Brunswick County, North Carolina school board, ignoring legal advice to the contrary, voted 3-2 last week to formulate a policy that would permit the Gideons to distribute Bibles in both middle schools and high schools. Attorney Joseph Causey, citing the 1998 Fourth Circuit case of Peck v. Upshur County Board of Education, had advised the school board to limit distributions to high schoolers once per year, and to make the opportunity available to all religious groups. The Board, however, said it was responding to a specific request, and would deal with other requests on a case-by-case basis, according to an article in yesterday's State Port (NC) Pilot.

SC Trial Judge Decides Church's Dispute With Diocese

In Charleston, South Carolina Monday, a state Circuit Court (trial level) judge handed down a decision in a dispute between the Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina and All Saints Church of Pawley's Island that broke away from the diocese in a dispute over the ordination of gay bishops. The Charleston Post and Courier reports Judge Thomas W. Cooper, Jr. ruled that All Saints Church for now could continue to occupy the 60 acres of land on which its building sits. However, he said, ownership will ultimately have to be decided in probate court. That court will have to interpret a 1745 charitable trust that set aside the land for the Church of England. Judge Cooper ruled, on the other hand, that the Diocese holds rights to the name All Saints Parish Waccamaw, and to the cash and assets still held by the breakaway church. Appeals are expected.

Danish Prosecutor Will Not File Charges Against Jyllands-Posten

Yesterday, according to Jurist, Denmark's Director of Public Prosecutions decided that he will not bring criminal charges against the Jyllands-Posten newspaper for publishing caricatures of the prophet Muhammad last September. A complaint had been filed alleging that the paper violated sections 140 and 266 of the Danish Penal Code, but the prosecutor, according to his press release, found no violations. Nevertheless, he pointed out: "Section 140 of the Criminal Code protects religious feelings against mockery and scorn and Section 266 b protects groups of persons against scorn and degradation on account of their religion among other things. To the extent publicly made expressions fall within the scope of these rules there is, therefore, no free and unrestricted right to express opinions about religious subjects." The prosecutor also said that his decision is unappealable. The full text of his 10-page ruling analyzing the relevant legal provisions is also available online. [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

Litigants Agree Elementary Students May Read Bible At Recess

In Knoxville, Tennessee on Tuesday, according to the Associated Press, federal district judge Thomas Phillips scolded attorneys for the schools and the family of fifth-grader Luke Whitson for permitting a misunderstanding to escalate into into a federal lawsuit. Whitson's parents claim Karns Elementary School Principal Cathy Summa told Luke he could not study the Bible with other students during recess. The principal denies that she said this. At a meeting ordered by the judge, both sides agreed that Knox County Schools have not and will not have a policy or practice of banning students from reading religious texts at recess. However, the lawsuit has not been dismissed.

Pakistan Supreme Court Orders Websites With Muhammad Cartoons Blocked

On order of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, the Pakistan Telecommunications Authority has blocked access in the country to all websites displaying the controversial cartoons of Muhammad that were first published in a Danish paper. Asia Media reports that in the suit against a number of defendants, including Yahoo USA, attorney Qamar Afzal argued that availability of the cartoons should be declared to be intellectual terrorism. The court asked Attorney General of Pakistan Makhdoom Ali Khan to assist the court in determining how it can exercise broader jurisdiction to prevent availability of blasphemous material on websites all over the world. The court will take up the case again next Monday.

The International Freedom of Expression Exchange reported last week that the Pakistan Telecommunications Authority ordered Internet service providers to block 12 websites carrying the offending cartoons. ISPs, apparently as required by the PTA order, to implement the blackout have blocked all blogs hosted by blogspot.com.

Long Beach Seeking To Take Church Property For Condos

In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's Kelo decision, Baptist Press reported yesterday on the beginnings of a controversial attempt by redevelopment officials in Long Beach, California to use eminent domain to acquire the church building of the Filipino Baptist Fellowship. On March 13, the Long Beach Redevelopment Agency Board voted 6-0 to condemn the church in order to build condominiums, despite opposition from many community members. The church's attorney, John Eastman, director of The Claremont Institute’s Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, said proving that the taking is for a public use would be simple for the city because a church is tax-exempt and a housing project would bring in tax revenue.

Dutch Ministers Fail To Agree on Burka Ban

In the Netherlands yesterday, according to Expatica, Immigration and Integration Minister Rita Verdonk was unable to get cabinet agreement on banning the wearing of burkas in education, health care and certain other situations on security grounds. Two government parties have supported a broader ban that would prohibit wearing the burka anywhere in public. Legal experts, however, suggest that even a limited ban on the cloak worn by some Muslim women would violate the country's Constitutional protection of religious freedom.

California Bill Would Require Consideration of Religion In Adoptions

In California last month, Assemblyman Chuck DeVore introduced into the state legislature a bill that would require courts in adoptions and in appointment of guardians after terminating parental rights to consider "the religious, cultural, moral,and ethnic values of the child or of his or her birth parents, if those values are known or ascertainable by the exercise of reasonable care." (AB 2130).

Law Prof Says Anti-Gay Marriage Amendment Would Violate Religion Clauses

Two weeks ago, American University law professor Jamie Raskin testified before the Judicial Proceedings Committee of the Maryland State Senate in opposition to a proposed state constitutional amendment that would bar gay marriage. His testimony (full text) focused directly on free exercise and establishment clause issues posed by the amendment. He said:

[W]hen I hear testimony from my fellow Marylanders about how ending statewide marriage discrimination would collide with their church beliefs, my response is simple and, I hope, reassuring: Your church will never have to perform a marriage ceremony of any gay couple or indeed any couple of any kind that it disapproves of....

But the irony here is that the State today is stopping many churches and temples from marrying gay couples that the churches want to marry. That is, the State today is violating the rights of many churches--including Unitarian, Episcopal, Presybeterian and Jewish congregations, among many others--who seek to perform lawful weddings for their parishioners but may not simply because other groups of citizens think it would be wrong for them to do it.

Because America is for all its citizens regardless of religion and because so many churches have so many different belief systems, we are governed here not by religious law but by secular law. The rules of civil marriage--the license that the State grants you to marry--must be determined with respect to the federal and state Constitutions, not particular religious claims, no matter how fervently held.

Later, in response to a Senator's question about whether "God's law" prohibits gay marriage, Raskin replied:

"Senator, when you took your oath of office, you placed your hand on the Bible and swore to uphold the Constitution. You didn't place your hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible."

Raskin himself is a candidate for Maryland's State Senate this year. [Thanks to Roy Mersky via Religionlaw for the information.]

Ohio Clergy Group Plans Rally Today For Social Justice Issues

The AP reports that a rally is planned today by We Believe Ohio, a group of over 100 Protestant, Catholic and Jewish clergy in central Ohio that wants to move debate away from divisive issues such as gay marriage , and refocus on social justice issues issues, such as jobs, education and health care. (See prior posting on other religious political activities in Ohio.)

Article Chronicles New Partisan Appeals To Religion

Beliefnet this week carries a long article by Amy Sullivan titled Why Evangelicals Are Bolting the GOP. She says, "There is a growing recognition among mainstream Democrats and the once-quiescent Religious Left that they can reframe issues they care about in terms that appeal to religious voters." The article chronicles some of the attempts by the Republican party to prevent Democrats from succeeding in this strategy. It begins with a particularly interesting description of Republican opposition in the Alabama legislature to a Democratic-sponsored bill to permit a high school elective course on the Bible in history and culture.

Texas Moment of Silence Law Challenged

In Dallas, Texas, parents of an elementary school child filed suit in federal district court last Friday challenging Texas' statute providing for a moment of silence at the beginning of the school day. The Dallas Morning News reports that parents David and Shannon Croft alleged in their complaint that one of their children was told by a teacher to be quiet because the minute is a "time for prayer." Croft commented, "I do not believe there is any secular reason for a moment of silence. This is just a ruse to get prayer in school without calling it prayer in school. Is there any study showing a moment of silence helps education?" The Crofts are atheists, and Mr. Croft has complained to the schools a number of times about religious themed songs, school meetings of the Good News Club, and a poster in the school reading "In God We Trust".

The law, (Educ. Code 25.082) passed in 2003, allows children to "reflect, pray, meditate or engage in any other silent activities" for one minute after the American and Texas pledges at the beginning of each school day. In 1985, in Wallace v. Jaffree, the U.S. Supreme Court found that an Alabama moment of silence law was an unconstitutional promotion of prayer. State Rep. Dan Branch who co-sponsored the 2003 Texas law, said legislators, aware of constitutional issues, carefully worded the statute to create a neutral time. He said teachers have told him the law helps calm children down. Letting children pray in school makes them feel the school is not hostile toward their religion, he said.

Prisoner Claims Punishment For Prayer

In McLeod v. Still, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9702 (DNJ, Feb. 14, 2006), a New Jersey federal district judge let a somewhat unusual prisoner free exercise claim proceed. Prisoner Randolph McLeod claimed that his exercise of religion was infringed when he was interrupted and charged with a disciplinary violation in the prison's law library while he was typing a letter to a judge that contained a prayer. McLeod charged that in a second incident, a different corrections officer made slanderous remarks about the prisoner's religion while he was praying in his cell and threatened and punished him for praying.

Tennessee Paper Opposes Special Christian License Plates

The Jackson, Tennessee Sun today editorializes against a bill that his been introduced into the Tennessee legislature to provide for a new specialty license plate carrying the Christian symbol of a fish. The bill is HB 3072 and its companion SB 3204. The newspaper's editorial argues that the state special license plate program should be limited to secular themes.

Battle In Wisconsin Over Angel Statue In Public Park

A new variation of the battle over placing religious symbols on public property is brewing in Oshkosh, Wisconsin. The Associated Press reports that the nonprofit grief-support group, Compassionate Friends, would like to place a "Christmas Box Angel" statue in the city's Menominee Park. The Freedom From Religion Foundation threatens to sue if the city accepts the offer. The angels, which cost about $20,000 each, are based on "The Christmas Box," a book by Richard Paul Evans about a widow and the young family who moves in with her. Christmas Box House International says that the angel statutes, currently located in Salt Lake City and a number of other areas, are places for grieving parents to come to heal.

Purim Humor Aims At U.S. Politics

Tonight begins the Jewish holiday of Purim, which marks the escape of the Persian Jewish community from destruction, as recounted in the biblical Book of Esther. One tradition of Purim is the creation of humorous parodies. This week's Philadelphia Jewish Voice, in that tradition, carries five attempts at Purim humor parodying American politics. The articles-- which make for refreshing, albeit somewhat partisan, reading-- are titled Daylin Leach: Minyan Maker In Harrisburg; Liberals Flip-Flop on Vice-Presidential Hunting Trips ; Halliburton Wins Contract to Reconstruct Cheney's Reputation; U.S. Outsources Homeland Security to North Korea; and Bush: "I Am An Oilaholic".

Religious Freedom Issues In Tajikistan

Forum 18 reports today that Tajikistan's planned new law on religion will require registration of religious organizations, in violation of international human rights norms. It will join four other former Soviet republics in imposing this kind of requirement. Forum 18 also reports that authorities refuse to permit a madrasa, closed because of its members affiliation with the Islamic Revival Party, to reopen. The government says the Islamic school does not have a license from the Muslim Spiritual Administration (MSA). However the MSA no longer functions in the country, so there is no group that can grant the madrasa a license.

New Law & Religion Scholarship Online

A number of new scholarly articles of interest have recently been posted online:

From Bepress:

• Shelley Ross Saxer & Daryl Fisher-Ogden, World Religions and Clean Water Laws.
• Marc L. Roark, All in the Family: The Apocalyptic Legal Tradition as Crit Theory.
• Marc L. Roark, Understanding Jurisprudential Approaches to Islam.
• Mark Osler, Christ, Christians & Capital Punishment.
  

From SSRN

• Robin Charlow, The Elusive Meaning of Religious Equality, to appear in Winter 2006 Washington Univ. Law Review.
• Scott C. Idleman, Religious Premises, Legislative Judgments, and the Establishment Clause (recently posted online, though it appeared in the 2002 issue of the Cornell Journal of Law & Public Policy).
  

New Jersey Church Has Preliminary RLUIPA Win

In Church of the Hills of Bedminster v. Township of Bedminster, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9488 (DNJ, Feb. 24, 2006) a New Jersey federal district court upheld the constitutionality of the land use provisions of RLUIPA over a wide variety of constitutional attacks, and found that plaintiff's complaint adequately stated a claim under RLUIPA and the Equal Protection Clause,. However, it dismissed plaintiff's due process claim. The decision permits Church of the Hills to move forward in its challenge to a denial of zoning variances sought to accommodate the church's planned expansion.