Hungary Enacts Restrictive New Religion Law

MTI reports that on Monday, Hungary's Parliament, by a vote of 254-43, passed a new law on "The Right to Freedom of Conscience and Religion and on the Status of Churches, Religions and Religious Communities." A press release by the Institute on Religion and Public Policy (IRPP) calls it the "worst religion law in Europe." The law specifically recognizes 14 religious groups and communities. All others will need to obtain re-registration. Reports on the new law are unclear on whether re-registration requires judicial or parliamentary approval.  Only groups that have operated in Hungary for 20 years can be re-registered however, though just before final passage Parliament eliminated a provision that would also have required 1000 members to register. An analysis by IRPP says:

The Draft Law would “de-register” targeted minority faiths that have been registered as religions in Hungary since the adoption of the 1990 Religion Law, while allowing favored religious organizations to maintain their registered religious status and enjoy all the rights and privileges that flow to religious organizations under the Bill. Over a hundred religious organizations currently registered as such will be retroactively stripped of their status as religious communities and “de-registered” as religious organizations....

In response to the Institute’s Report, some proponents of this legislation in Hungary have attempted to justify these discriminatory provisions by arguing that they meet human rights standards because “deregistered” religious organizations may continue to operate as “civil associations performing religious activities”.

Irish Government Report Criticizes Cloyne Diocese Failure To Report Sex Abuse

In Ireland yesterday, the government made public a 341-page report, The Commission of Investigation Report into the Catholic Diocese of Cloyne. The government commissioned the report in 2009 after the Church's own National Board for Safeguarding Children published a critical report on child protection practices in the diocese. As reported by the Irish Times, the report released yesterday strongly criticizes the Vatican. The report says in part:

The document entitled Child Sexual Abuse: Framework for a Church Response ... was agreed by the Irish Bishops’ Conference in 1996.... This document contained a detailed and easy to implement set of procedures for handling allegations, suspicions and concerns about clerical child sexual abuse....

Despite Bishop Magee’s stated position on the implementation of the Framework Document, the reality is that the guidelines set out in that document were not fully or consistently implemented in the Diocese of Cloyne in the period 1996 to 2009. The primary responsibility for the failure to implement the agreed procedures lies with Bishop Magee....  [He] took little or no active interest in the management of clerical child sexual abuse cases until 2008.... As a result of this vacuum, the diocese’s functions in the matter of clerical child sexual abuse were, by default, exercised by others, ... [principally] Monsignor O’Callaghan. He did not approve of ... the requirement to report to the civil authorities....

The reaction of the Vatican to the Framework Document was entirely unhelpful to any bishop who wanted to implement the agreed procedures.... The Congregation for the Clergy told the bishops of Ireland that the document was “not an official document of the Episcopal Conference but merely a study document”. The Congregation further stated that it contained:  “procedures and dispositions which appear contrary to canonical discipline and which, if applied, could invalidate the acts of the same Bishops who are attempting to put a stop to these problems....

This effectively gave individual Irish bishops the freedom to ignore the procedures which they had agreed and gave comfort and support to those who, like Monsignor O’Callaghan, dissented from the stated official Irish Church policy.

In reaction to the report, Justice Minster Alan Shatter said  he will introduce legislation making it a criminal offense to fail to report the sexual abuse of a child or a vulnerable adult. (Irish Times.) RTE News has a summary of the report and extensive coverage of the reaction to it by both Church and government officials. (See prior related posting.)

States Enact Record Number of Abortion Restrictions In 2011

The Guttmacher Institute yesterday reported that in the first 6 months of 2011, state legislatures enacted a record  80 new provisions restricting access to abortion. This is more than double the previous record-- 34 enacted in 2005.  The states also enacted 82 other provisions relating to reproductive health and reproductive rights.

FFRF Sues Texas Governor Over Planned Prayer Rally

The Freedom from Religion Foundation announced yesterday that it and 5 of its Houston, Texas members have filed a federal lawsuit seeking:

a declaration that Texas Governor Rick Perry’s initiation, organization, promotion and participation as governor in a prayer rally at Reliant Stadium in Houston, Texas, scheduled for August 6, 2011, in collaboration with the American Family Association, violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

 The complaint (full text) in Staley v. Perry, (SD TX, filed 7/13/2011), says that the plans for the prayer rally were preceded by an official proclamation from the governor calling on Texans to participate in a Day of Prayer and Fasting for Our Nation. In addition to a declaratory judgment, the complaint asks the court to order the governor to withdraw his permission for the American Family Association to use his written and videotaped endorsements of the rally on its website, and to enjoin his future promotion of prayer rallies or designating days of prayer in the future. (See prior related posting.)

"Sister Wives" Challenge Utah's Ban on Polygamy

A lawsuit was filed in federal district court in Utah yesterday by the polygamous family featured on the TLC series "Sister Wives" challenging the constitutionality of Utah's statute which bars polygamy.  The complaint (full text) in Brown v. Herbert, (D UT, filed 7/13/3011) summarizes the claims of Kody Brown and his 4 wives as follows:

To the extent that Article III of the Utah State Constitution, Utah Code Ann. §30-1-2, and ... §30-1-4.1 are used as the basis for the criminalization of plural relationships or families, the Brown family seeks a declaration that these laws are unconstitutional under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment ... and the Free Exercixe, Establishment, Free Speech, and Freedom of Association Clauses of the Firat Amendment....

According to the Salt Lake Tribune, plaintiffs' lawyer filing the lawsuit-- George Washington University Prof. Jonathan Turley -- at a press conference said: "We can’t embrace privacy as a principle and pick and choose who can enjoy it."  Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff says polygamy is different because it involves not just consenting adults, but also their entire families. According to AP, Utah has not prosecuted  prosecuted anyone for polygamy under its bigamy statute since 2003. However, according to the complaint in the lawsuit, the Browns have been subject to criminal investigations in Utah.

Court Enjoins New York City's Disclosure Law For Pregnancy Centers

In Evergreen Association, Inc. v. City of New York, (SD NY, July 13, 2011), a New York federal district court issued a preliminary injunction preventing New York City's Local Law 17 from taking effect as scheduled today. The law requires "pregnancy services centers" that do not have a licensed medical professional on the premises to make disclosures regarding the availability of a licensed medical provider, and whether it provides referrals for abortions, emergency contraception and prenatal care. The disclosures must be made in English and Spanish on signs in the waiting room and elsewhere, in any ads for the center, and orally to anyone requesting abortion, emergency contraception or prenatal care.

The court concluded that the ordinance violates defendants' free speech rights by compelling defendants to disseminate a particular message.  It held that strict scrutiny applies in reviewing the ordinance because plaintiffs' offering of pregnancy services were not commercial speech. Instead they were grounded in their opposition to abortion and emergency contraception. The court concluded that while the law was enacted to counteract deceptive practices that interfere with access to reproductive health services or mislead women into believing they had received care from a licensed medical provider, it is not narrowly tailored. Less burdensome alternatives are available to achieve the city's purpose. Also the court found that the definition of "pregnancy services center" is unconstitutionally vague. The American Center for Law and Justice issued a press release announcing the decision.

Protesters Enjoined From Disrupting Church Services Anywhere In U.S.

Two separate orders, one a consent decree and one a default judgment, were issued Monday by a Michigan federal district court in Mount Hope Church v. Bash Back!, (WD MI, July 11, 2011). The lawsuit grew out of a protest, infiltration and disruption of the Church's service in November 2008 by a self-described "Radical Trans/Queer" group. (See prior posting.)  The orders permanently enjoin the group and individual defendants from

disrupting a religious service anywhere in the United States by shouting, yelling, throwing objects, unfurling a banner or displaying any other sign not approved by the church, or by otherwise causing a disturbance.

The consent decree in the case of the individual defendants added: "The Defendants shall retain their right to engage in lawful First Amendment speech in a public forum." This qualification was not in the otherwise identical operative language of the default judgment against the organization itself.

The orders also permanently enjoin defendants "from conducting a protest on the private property of any place of worship in the United States" and "from blocking, impeding, or making unreasonably difficult ingress or egress to entrances and/or exits of any place of worship in the United States." Alliance Defense Fund issued a press release announcing the orders.

Kentucky Death Row Inmates Sue For Pastoral Visits

AP reports that a group of death row inmates in Kentucky have filed a class action in federal court challenging Kentucky State Penitentiary's policy of denying one-on-one pastoral visits to death row inmates. State officials declined comment on the lawsuit.

9th Circuit: Damages Under RLUIPA Still Recoverable Against Municipalities

In Centro Familiar Cristiano Buenas Nuevas v. City of Yuma, (9th Cir., July 12, 2011), the 9th Circuit held that a church which was wrongfully required to obtain a conditional use permit for its building can recover damages under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act despite the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Sossamon v. Texas. (See prior posting). The 9th Circuit reasoned:

Sossamon is grounded on the line of Eleventh Amendment authority requiring "clear expression" to abrogate the sovereign immunity of states from damages claims. The Eleventh Amendment requirement does not apply to municipalities. The City of Yuma,therefore, may be liable for monetary damages under RLUIPA, if plaintiffs prove a violation and damages.

The court went on to find that requiring a conditional use permit for religious organizations and not for other membership organizations was a violation of the "equal terms" provision of RLUIPA.  Yuma had attempted to justify the different treatment on the ground that the presence of the church would have precluded issuance of liquor permits to other businesses within 300 feet.  But the court responded that "many of the uses permitted as of right would have the same practical effect as a church of blighting a potential block of bars and nightclubs." The Yuma (AZ) Sun reports on the decision.

Illinois Catholic Charities Gets Temporary Restoration of State Foster Care Contracts

Last month, three Illinois Catholic dioceses-- those of Springfield, Peoria and Joliet--  filed a state court lawsuit  seeking a declaratory judgement that they are acting within the law in offering adoption and foster care services only to married couples and to non-cohabiting single individuals and in refusing to place children with couples in same-sex civil unions. (See prior posting.)  Now AP reports that yesterday, a Sangamon County Circuit Court issued a temporary injunction, pending a hearing next month, reinstating the state contracts relating to children in Catholic Charities supported foster homes. The court expressed concern that abrupt termination could affect the well being of the children in foster care.  The state had argued that the issue was moot since the contracts expired June 30 and had not been renewed because Catholic Charities indicated they would not comply with state law.  Catholic Charities wants to be able to refer same-sex couples to other adoption and foster care agencies.

UPDATE: AP reported on July 13 that Illinois will not cut off funding to other faith-based agencies in the state for existing children in foster care, even though they are not covered by this injunction, until this case is resolved.

UPDATE2: The Chicago Tribune reported July 15 that dioceses in Springfield, Peoria and Joliet filed emergency motions to obtain a clarification from the court on whether under its order the state can stop referring new cases to Catholic Charities. UPDATE3: Here is a copy of the motion filed by the dioceses.

Town Clerk Resigns Over New York Same-Sex Marriages

In the town of Barker, New York, 56-year old Laura Fotusky has become the first town clerk in the state to resign over the recently enacted same-sex marriage bill.  According to the International Business Times, Fotusky says that her religious beliefs preclude her from signing a marriage certificate for a same-sex couple. The full text of Fotusky's resignation letter is included in a posting on the website of New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms.  In the letter, which was presented to the Town Board on July 11, she says: "I would be compromising my moral conscience if I participated in the licensing procedure."

UK Equality Commission Wants European Court To Require Accommodation of Employees' Religious Beliefs

Britain's Equality and Human Rights Commission announced Monday that it has petitioned to intervene in four religious discrimination cases being appealed to the European Court of Human Rights, all involving attempt by employees to obtain accommodation of their religious practices.  In its applications to intervene, the Commission argues that past decisions have not sufficiently protected freedom of religion or belief.  It will urge the Court to adopt a principle of reasonable accommodation of religious beliefs.  Two of the cases involve female employees who wished to wear a cross on a necklace in violation of their employers' dress policies. (Applications of Nadia Eweida and Shirley Chaplin).  The second two cases involved employees with religous objections to same-sex unions.  One case involved a marriage registrar who objected to taking part in registration of same-sex civil partnerships.  The second involved a counselor who had concerns about providing sexual counselling to same-sex couples. (Applications of Lillian Ladele and Gary McFarlane).

9th Circuit Tells Government To Clarify Its Position On "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday issued an order requiring the Obama Administration to clarify its position on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."  The district court held the law unconstitutional, and Congress has enacted a repeal of policy which becomes effective when the President, Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff certify that certain conditions have been met. (See prior posting.) In Log Cabin Republicans v. United States, (9th Cir., July 11, 2011), the 9th Circuit said:

No party to this appeal has indicated an intention to defend the constitutionality of § 654 or to argue that the constitutionality holding of the district court should be reversed.

The Government, of course, may refrain from defending the constitutionality of “any provision of any Federal statute.” 28 U.S.C §530D(a)(1)(B)(ii) (providing that the Attorney General shall submit a report to Congress outlining his decision to refrain from defending a Federal statute)....If the Government chooses not to defend the constitutionality of § 654, however, the court may allow amicus curiae to participate in oral argument in support of constitutionality....

The government was ordered to advise the court whether it intendes to submit a §530D report to Congress in a timely manner so Congress can intervene. The parties were also ordered to show cause why the case should not be dismissed as moot, at least once the Congressional repeal takes effect. National Law Journal reports on the court's order.

Interagency Group On Religion and Global Affairs Chaired From White House

In a White House blog posting yesterday, Joshua Dubois, Executive Director of the White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships, discusses the Interagency Working Group on Religion and Global Affairs that was launched, co-chaired by the White House Faith-Based Office and the White House National Security staff.  He said in part:

This groundbreaking working developed a comprehensive map of how our government currently engages religious actors in foreign affairs through USAID Missions, Embassies, and Departments across government from the Department of Defense to the Department of Health and Human Services. As a result of this work, we’ve seen new courses in religious engagement at the Foreign Service Institute, new efforts on religion and global affairs at the State Department, and a renewed focus on the intersection of religion and foreign policy across the United States Government.

We also work closely with the National Security Staff to make sure that the administration is supporting the protection of religious minorities. We formed a first-ever interagency working group towards this end, and meet regularly to ensure that federal agencies are working with one another towards a comprehensive approach to religious minority protection.

Pakistani Court Orders More Train Cars For Pilgrims To Saint's Urs

In Pakistan yesterday, the Lahore High Court ordered the Pakistan Railways to add extra cars to its trains to facilitate transportation for Sufis who want to attend the annual Urs (death anniversary) of the saint, Shahbaz Qalandar.  According to Pakistan's The News, in past years the railway ran 14 special trains for the celebration.  The railroad said that financial constraints led it to end the special trains this year.  The court issued its order after evidence was presented that the railroad had operated eight special trains for Sikh pilgrims during the last 6 months. The railroad insisted that most of those were arranged because of international commitments.

China Defends Its Religious Liberty Record In Tibet

The Information Office of China's State Council yesterday published a White Paper titled: Sixty Years Since the Peaceful Liberation of Tibet.  A section of the White Paper defends China's polices on religious freedom in Tibet.  It says in part:

Freedom of religious belief of all ethnic groups is respected and protected in Tibet. All religions, all religious sects are equal in Tibet. The Living Buddha reincarnation system, unique to Tibetan Buddhism, is fully respected. People are free to learn and debate Buddhist doctrines, get ordained as monks and practice Buddhist rites. Academic degrees in Buddhism are also promoted. The central government has listed some famous sites for religious activities as cultural relics units subject to state or autonomous regional protection, including the Potala Palace, Jokhang Monastery, and Tashilhunpo, Drepung, Sera and Sakya monasteries. Tibet now has more than 1,700 venues for religious activities and about 46,000 monks and nuns. Monks and laymen organize and take part in the Sakadawa Festival and other religious and traditional activities every year. More than 1 million worshipers make pilgrimage to Lhasa each year.

(See prior related posting.)

Restaurant Wins in Employee's Religious Accommodation Lawsuit

A jury in a Nueces County, Texas trial court yesterday ruled in favor of the restaurant chain, Texas Roadhouse, in a case in which a former employee charged religious discrimination.  According to a press release from defendant's attorneys, the employee claimed that management of the Corpus Christie (TX) Roadhouse forced him to work on Sundays in violation of his religious beliefs.  While the employee was given most Sundays off, he was required to work on Mothers Day and Fathers Day-- two of the restaurant's busiest days of the year.  He was fired for refusing to come in on Fathers Day 2008. Defendants claimed the employee abandoned his job and was not terminated.

Challenger Lacks Standing In Suit To Stop Ground Zero Mosque

The New York Times reports that a state trial court on Friday dismissed a lawsuit by a former fire fighter who is attempting to prevent the construction of an Islamic community center in lower Manhattan near "Ground Zero". (See prior posting.) Plaintiff Timothy Brown was attempting to overturn a decision by the New York City Landmark Preservation Commission that denied landmark status for the old Burlington Coat Factory building that will be destroyed to make space for the mosque and community center. The court concluded that Brown lacks standing to challenge the landmark decision despite his strong interest in the matter.

UPDATE: The full decision in Brown v. New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission, (NY Co. Sup. Ct., July 7, 2011) is now available online.

Sweden Refuses To Recognize Anti-Copyright Believers As A Religion

According to The Local, in Sweden last week the government's Legal, Financial and Administrative Services Agency rejected attempts of the Missionary Church of Kopimism (pronounced "copy me-ism") to register as a religious faith.  The church was started by the youth division of the Pirate Party, a political party founded in Sweden in 2006 to promote Internet file sharing and to protect people's online privacy. Kopimism contends that "the act of copying is sacred," opposing those who wish to enforce copyright restrictions.

What Will Be Religion-State Balance In New Egyptian Constitution?

Prof. Samer Soliman of the American University in Cairo yesterday published an article in Ahram Online analyzing the proposals of various groups involved in drafting a new Egyptian Constitution on what should be the relationship between religion and state in Egypt. He wrote in part:

Although many civic and human rights forces opposed Article 2 of the previous constitution (which states Islam is the religion of the state and Islamic Sharia the main source of legislation), because it discriminates against non-Muslims and is used by conservative powers to establish religious powers, various versions of the new constitution maintain this article in place. It seems that civic forces are now convinced that the large majority of Egyptian Muslims want this article to remain in place since it reflects the Islamic identity of the people.

This realistic acceptance of Article 2 of the previous constitution does not mean that the authors of the proposed constitutions are not trying to prevent this article from being used to establish a full-fledged religious state....

It is unlikely that Islamic forces will insist on creating an entity of religious scholars because it will be strongly opposed by the people, and it would be difficult to decide how to choose its members. It is more likely that Islamist forces will maintain Article 2 as it stands, but will reject clauses that give power to the army or judiciary to intervene to guarantee the civic character of the state. In such a case, we will return to where we were during the Mubarak era in terms of the relationship between state and religion, namely a quasi-civic state with religious overtones.