Limitations Issues In Priest Abuse Case Decided

Last month, an Illinois appellate court, after a rehearing, filed a modified opinion in a priest sexual abuse case that decides interesting questions relating to statute of limitations issues. In Softcheck v. Imesch, (IL 3d Dist. App., Sept. 1, 2006), the court held that 2003 amendments to Illinois' statute of limitations cannot apply retroactively to revive claims for which the prior limitations period had run before 2003. In a 2-1 decision, the court held that the prior statute of limitations had not been tolled under the discovery rule. Plaintiffs' allegations that they did not, until recently, realize the wrongfulness of defendants' conduct were insufficient to prevent the statute from running. Finally, the court held that it was not being asked to unconstitutionally pass on the validity of church doctrine by allegations that defendant priests assured plaintiffs that instructions of the Church were infallible and complying with directions of priests would be beneficial. The original appellate decision had been handed down in January.

Minneapolis Bus Driver Can Avoid Busses With Offensive Ad

The McClatchy Newspapers yesterday reported on a decision by Minneapolis (MN) transit officials to accommodate religious beliefs of a bus driver. The driver objected on religious grounds to an ad carried on some 25 of the city's 150 busses. The ad promotes a local magazine aimed at gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered readers. An internal memo by the Transit Authority gives the employee permission to refrain from driving any of the busses that carry the offensive ad. The decision is of particular interest in light of last month's decision by Minneapolis-St. Paul airport officials to accommodate Muslim cab drivers who object to transporting passengers who bring alcohol in the cab.

Rabbis Seek Move To Jewish Religious Courts For Civil Cases In Israel

In Israel yesterday, a group of rabbis and experts in Jewish law launched "Gazit", a chain of nine Jewish religious courts that they hope will replace the nation's civil courts. Today's Jerusalem Post says that the organizers hope that tort and contract disputes will be settled according to Jewish law in these courts instead of in civil courts under Israeli civil law. They envision the Jewish law courts being used by both Jews and non-Jews. Currently the decisions of these courts will already be recognized by civil courts in the same way that decisions of other arbitral bodies are enforced. Experts say that for this initiative to succeed, issues relating to testimony of women and of non-Jews in Jewish religious courts will need to be worked out.

California Courts Hear Arguments Over Cross and Constitution

Two separate appellate courts in California yesterday heard arguments in cases involving challenges to alleged unconstitutional uses of a cross by local authorities. In Pasadena, a panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments in a case challenging a 2004 decision by Los Angeles county to remove a cross from the county's official seal. Today's Los Angeles Daily Bulletin reports that the suit was filed by the Thomas More Law Center on behalf of county Department of Public Works employee. He alleges that the change in the county's seal violated the Constitution by conveying a state-sponsored message of disapproval and hostility toward Christianity. The county has already spent $700,000 replacing the old seal with the new one that features a mission and an American Indian.

Meanwhile, in a state appellate court in San Diego, oral arguments were being held on one aspect of the long-running dispute over the Mt. Soledad cross. The San Diego Union Tribune today reports that the "lively" two-hour oral argument focused on a 2005 trial court ruling that Proposition A-- a voter initiative transferring land under the Mt. Soledad cross to the federal government-- was unconstitutional. The lower court had found that the voters had intended to aid religion in violation of California's constitutional provisions prohibiting such aid or favoritism.

Indiana Released Time Program Challenged

In Morgan County, Indiana, a federal lawsuit has been filed by an elementary school parent challenging the Weekday Religious Education Program offered to Neil Armstrong Elementary School students. IndyStar today reports on the litigation, filed through the ACLU of Indiana. The complaint (full text) alleges that the religious classes are offered from a trailer on school property, and that school officials monitor enrollment and single out students who elect not to participate. Mary Parker, an adviser to Morgan County Schools on the program, said that the trailer is on the edge of school grounds for convenience, and that utilities and other costs are paid by the non-profit group offering the program. However, she said that if necessary to avoid controversy, the location of the program would be moved. 1500 3rd and 4th graders in Morgan and Adams counties participate in the one-hour-per-week Christian education program.

Requiring Midwifery License Might Violate Religious Freedom

A Florida state appellate court has held that Linda and Tanya McGlade, convicted of practicing midwifery without a license, may be able to challenge their convictions under Florida's Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The women sought to post bond pending appeal of their convictions, but the trial court refused, according to yesterday's Manatee Herald. Bond is allowed under Florida law (Title XLVII, Sec. 903.132) only if the appeal is "in good faith on grounds not frivolous but fairly debatable". The appellate court reversed the denial of bond, saying that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act is a reasonable, arguable ground for the appeal by the women who had been sentenced to 30 months in prison in the case that involved the death of the mother whose delivery they assisted.

UPDATE: Saturday's Manatee Herald reported that trial judge Edward Nicholas has refused to grant release to the McGlades, despite the appellate court ruling. Nicholas on Thursday refused to permit the women to post bond because he believes that they would likely continue their illegal activity if released. Defense attorney Colleen Glenn filed an emergency motion with the appellate court on Friday to reverse the denial. Saturday's Sarasota Herald Tribune has more background on the case. The woman whose childbirth was aided by the McGlades was a relative. The McGlades believe that the licensing law was not meant to apply to that kind of situation.

Recent Prisoner Cases On Religious Rights

In Campbell v. Alameida, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73111 (ND CA, Sept. 25, 2006), a California federal district court rejected an inmate’s claims that the refusal to permit him to purchase and keep religious oils in his cell violated his rights under the 1st and 14th Amendments. It found that while the refusal may have violated his rights under RLUIPA, defendants had qualified immunity from damages, and no injunctive relief was available because now prison authorities were permitting plaintiff to have the requested oils.

In Jesus Christ Prison Ministry v. California Department of Corrections, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73813 (ED CA, Sept. 28, 2006), a federal magistrate judge ruled that a California prison’s policy of permitting religious literature, audio tapes and CDs only from approved vendors violates the free speech and free exercise rights, as well as rights under RLUIPA, of prisoners, as well as the rights of non-approved organizations wishing to distribute religious literature.

In Long v. Boehnemann, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74532 (SD TX, Oct. 12, 2006), a Texas federal district court dismissed a suit alleging that a county jail’s kitchen manager denied plaintiff reasonable provisions during Ramadan. The court found that plaintiff had failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, that his transfer made his claims for injunctive relief moot, that federal law bars monetary damages absent a physical injury, that no First Amendment violation was shown, and that RLUIPA allows recovery only against governmental entities.

In Tayr v. Wisconsin Department of Corrections, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74835 (ED WI, Sept. 29, 2006), a Wisconsin federal district court rejected a Muslim prisoner's claims that he was denied the right to use his religious name and was denied a religious diet, in violation of the First Amendment and RLUIPA. The court permitted claims relating to the denial of the use of religious property to move ahead.

Court Invalidates Eagle Protection Act Implementation As RFRA Violation

Last week, a federal district court in Wyoming granted a motion to dismiss criminal charges that had been filed against Winslow Friday, a member of the Northern Arapaho Indian Tribe. In United States v. Friday, (Case No. 05-CR-260-D, Oct. 13, 2006), the court held that the government's implementation of the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) violates the defendant's right to the free exercise of religion as protected by the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

The BGEPA provides for a permitting process for the taking of eagles for Native American religious purposes. The government, however, discourages requests for permits and issues almost none. The court held that the government failed to demonstrate that this policy is the least restrictive means of advancing its interest in preserving eagle populations and protecting Native American culture, particularly in light of the recent recovery of the species. It concluded:

Although the Government professes respect and accommodation of the religious practices of Native Americans, its actions show callous indifference to such practices. It is clear to this Court that the Government has no intention of accommodating the religious beliefs of Native Americans except on its own terms and in its own good time.

The court also upheld Friday's standing to challenge the futile permitting process even though he never applied for a permit.

The full text of the case is available through PACER. The Jackson Hole (WY) Star Tribune today reported on the court's decision. (Also see prior related posting.)

UPDATE: The decision is now available on LEXIS at 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74970.

Virginia Ballot Will Have Proposal To Permit Churches To Incorporate

Virginia voters this November will be asked to approve an amendment (full text) repealing a provision in Art. IV, Sec. 14 of the state's constitution that prohibits the legislature from granting a charter of incorporation to any church or religious denomination. Today's Hampton Roads Pilot reports that the vote will have little practical significance since a federal District Court in 2002 ruled that the ban violates the First Amendment's guarantee of free exercise of religion.

House of Lords To Consider Removing Christian Prayer In Schools Requirement

Great Britain's House of Lords this week will debate a proposed amendment to the Education and Inspections Bill that would remove the requirement that schools to provide a daily "act of collective worship" that must be "wholly or mainly of a broadly Christian character". The amendment instead calls for assemblies that are inclusive of all children, according to a press release issued by a coalition of religious groups, teaching unions and the British Humanist Association. A briefing paper issued by the coalition supporting the change points out that the new language will call for school assemblies that further pupils' "spiritual, moral, social and cultural education". (See prior related posting.)

FBI Hate Crimes Stats For 2005 Released

The FBI yesterday released data on hate crimes in the United States for 2005. Overall, such crimes were down by 6% from the previous year, according to a report by the Associated Press. Just over 17% of all hate crimes in 2005 targeted victims because of their religious beliefs. The detailed data is available from the FBI's website.

7th Circuit Rejects RLUIPA Challenge To Forced Feeding

In O'Malley v. Litscher, (7th Cir., Oct. 16, 2006), the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday rejected a prisoner's claim that prison officials violated his rights under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act by force feeding him to end his protest fast. Robert O'Malley claimed he was using the power of prayer and fasting to ask God to move his former accusers to recant testimony that led to his conviction for sexual assault. Ultimately prison officials obtained a court order permitting them to force feed O'Malley. The court held that the choice of methods to end O'Malley's fast did not implicate his religious rights. It also held that carrying out a state court's order is not an independent violation of the constitution or of RLUIPA. [Thanks to How Appealing for the information.]

Alaska Supreme Court Decides Church Property Dispute

The Alaska Supreme Court this week, in a case of first impression under Alaska law, decided how property disputes should be resolved following a schism between a church an its parent body. In St. Paul Church Inc. v. Board of Trustees of the Alaska Missionary Conference of the United Methodist Church, Inc., (AK Sup. Ct., Oct. 13, 2006), the court applied an approach that relied on neutral principles of law to determine that the Alaska Missionary Conference (AMC) was entitled to possession to two parcels of property acquired by St. Paul's when it was affiliated with the United Methodist Church. However, the court held that St. Paul's Church was entitled to retain its independent corporate existence and name. The court also upheld trespass and conversion claims against individuals connected with St. Paul's who entered the church, changed the locks and held services in it over the objections of AMC.

City's Public Access Channel Pulls Religious-Political Videos

After a complaint from the president of the East County (California) Democratic Club, the City Manager of El Cajon, CA has removed videos created by David Barton, Vice Chair of the Texas Republican Party, from the city-owned public access television channel, according to the Raw Story yesterday. The city had a policy that it would not accept programming that directly promotes religious beliefs or religious philosophies for broadcast. Nevertheless, it had paid over $2500 per year for videos produced by WallBuilders that focus on "the Godly foundation of our country" and had political, historical and Christian themes. (The videos on DVD are available on WallBuilders website for $19.95 each.) In particular, Democrats objected to the airing of a video titled "The Role of Pastors & Christians in Civil Government".

Illinois Bishops Issue Statement On Conscience and Voting

Yesterday, the six Catholic bishops of Illinois issued a statement on Elections, Conscience, and the Responsibility to Vote. In part, it reads:

Catholics should always vote for that person most committed to being a public servant dedicated to the common good. ...[A]ny candidate who supports a public policy where part of humanity (such as the pre-born, the elderly, the handicapped, or the sick) is excluded from the protection of law and treated as if they were non-persons is gravely deficient in his or her view of the requirements of a just society.

Too often, the choice of candidates for elected office falls short of a vision of the common good as rich and full as Catholic social teaching. This may be discouraging, so we call on Catholics who understand and accept the Church’s teaching to become more engaged in political life.... In Illinois, we make up almost one-third of the population.... For Catholics, voting ought not to be seen as just an option or a privilege but a duty. By voting with an informed conscience, a renewed "Catholic vote" could become a political force for justice....

Cert. Denied In Scouts' Suit Against Berkeley Non-Discrimination Policy

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court, after agreeing to permit several groups to file amicus briefs, denied certiorari in Evans v. City of Berkeley, (No. 06-40). In the case, the California Supreme Court had upheld the right of a city to suspend free use of its marina by the Sea Scouts (a Boy Scout affiliate) because the scouts refused to confirm that they would not discriminate against gays and atheists. (See prior posting.) The Los Angeles Times, covering the denial of cert., reported "Some conservative groups had joined the challenge to the Berkeley policy, saying that advocates of 'traditional moral values' were being subjected to discrimination nationwide by 'politically correct' government officials." Here are the full amicus briefs filed by the United States Justice Foundation, and by the Boy Scouts of America. [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

Ballot Measure On Alcohol Sales Raises Church-State Issues

In Arkansas City, Kansas, voters are being asked to vote to overturn city council's decision to permit the sale of alcohol on Sundays. The Ark City Traveler on Monday reported that many who oppose the ballot measure see it as an infringement on the separation of church and state, while some who support the ban on Sunday alcohol sales see it as supporting the mandate in the Ten Commandments to honor the Sabbath.

Cert. Petition Filed In Polygamy Case

A petition of certiorari has been filed seeking U.S. Supreme Court review of the Utah Supreme Court's decision in State of Utah v. Holm. (See prior posting.) Today's Salt Lake Tribune reports that the petition asks the high court to review the constitutionality of polygamy laws, arguing that the right to privacy precludes states regulating intimate relationships that occur outside of marriage. Rodney Holm is a member of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints that considers taking multiple wives to be a religious obligation. Utah's polygamy law permits prosecution of person like Holm who do not enter multiple legal marriages, but merely take additional wives in religious ceremonies.

New Zealand Will Penalize Excessive Political Activity By Churches

In New Zealand, government rules under the new Charities Act of 2005 will permit the country's Charities Commission to strip churches (and other charities) of their tax exempt status if their predominant activity is political advocacy for social change rather than engaging in charitable activities. Political advocacy as a "subsidiary activity" will still be allowed, according to a report today in the Dominion Post.

Sunnis In Iraq Want Separate Islamic State

Reuters reported yesterday that in a video on an Iraqi website, the leader of a Sunni insurgent coalition led by al Qaeda has called for the setting up of a separate Islamic state in Baghdad and in the provinces of Anbar, Diyala, Kirkuk, Salahedddin, Nineveh and parts of Babel and Wasit-- all areas where there are large concentrations of Sunni Arabs. The move follows approval by Iraq's parliament of procedures for creating federal regions that could lead to a Shi'ite state in the center and south of the country.

UPDATE: The full text of the statement published this morning indicates that the Mujahideen Shura Council actually declared the establishment of an Islamic state in parts of Iraq. (Kavkaz Center).