Sudan Apostasy Case Draws U.S. Attention As Appeal Begins

Zegabi reports that in Khartoum, Sudan last week an Appeals Court hearing began in the case of 27-year old Meriam Yehya Ibrahim Ishag who was sentenced to death last month for maintaining her Christian faith, as well as to 100 lashes for adultery. Ishag's's father was a Muslim; so she is considered Muslim under Sudan's personal status law and her marriage to her Christian husband is considered void. (See prior posting.)  Meanwhile the case is garnering extensive attention in the United States.  On June 12, a group of demonstrators representing 46 organizations held a protest outside the White House.  Among the protesters were Sen. Ted Cruz who later told Christian Post:

We need far more leadership speaking out for religious liberty of everyone. And especially for Christians who are being targeted.... The reason this rally and protest is outside the White House is President Obama has to date failed to provide leadership on Meriam Ibrahim.

On the same day, Secretary of State John Kerry issued a statement (full text) calling on Sudan to release Ms. Ishag and to repeal its laws that are inconsistent with its 2005 Interim Constitution, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Suit Claims Church's Publicity On Muslim's Conversion Led To His Torture and Near Death In Syria

In Tulsa, Oklahoma, a John Doe plaintiff has filed a state court lawsuit seeking $75,000 in punitive damages against the First Presbyterian Church of Tulsa for publishing an online announcement of his December 2012 conversion from Islam to Christianity.  The complaint (full text) in Doe v. First Presbyterian Church U.S.A. of Tulsa, Oklahoma, (OK Dist. Ct., filed 6/9/2014), alleges that plaintiff travels periodically to Syria, and the church knew that any publicity about his baptism would pose a danger to his life. He says that when he was in Syria in January 2013, he was kidnapped, tortured and nearly beheaded before he escaped by forcibly taking a firearm from his captors and killing one of them who was his paternal uncle. He alleges he has received numerous death threats since returning to the United States.

Oklahoma's NewsOn6 and Tulsa Channel 8 report on the lawsuit and quote a statement in response released by the church which says in part: "The lawsuit is brought by a person who received the Sacrament of Baptism before the Congregation during a regular Sunday service at First Church." This appears to contradict the allegation in plaintiff's complaint that he received a "private baptism" at the church.

Facebook Not Liable For Delay In Removing Page Containing Anti-Jewish Threats

In Klayman v. Zuckerberg, (DC Cir., June 13, 2014), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit dismissed a suit against Facebook and its founder Mark Zuckerberg alleging assault and breach of duty of care growing out of Facebook's delay in removing a page titled "Third Palestinian Intifada."  The page proclaimed: "Judgment Day will be brought upon us only once Muslims have killed all the Jews." The suit alleged that it took Facebook "many days" after receiving complaints to remove the offending page.  Plaintiff sought an injunction and damages exceeding $1 billion.  The court held that Sec. 230(c) of the Communications Act (47 USC Sec. 230) shields Facebook from liability. That section provides:

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

Order Stayed By Court After Enjoining Wisconsin's Same-Sex Marriage Ban

As previously reported, on June 6 a Wisconsin federal district court declared Wisconsin's constitutional and statutory provisions barring same-sex marriage unconstitutional and instructed the parties to submit proposed language for an injunction. Now in Wolf v. Walker, (WD WI, June 13, 2014), the court issued a carefully worded injunction against the governor, state registrar and three county clerks. However the court also stayed the injunction, as well as its earlier declaratory judgment, until the conclusion of any appeals or after the expiration of the deadline for filing appeals.  Judge Crabb wrote in part:

If I were considering these factors as a matter of a first impression, I would be inclined to agree with plaintiffs that defendants have not shown that they are entitled to a stay. However, I cannot ignore the Supreme Court’s order in Herbert v. Kitchen, 134 S. Ct. 893 (2014), in which the Court stayed a district court’s order enjoining state officials in Utah from enforcing its ban on same-sex marriage.....  [S]ince Herbert, every statewide order enjoining the enforcement of a ban on same-sex marriage has been stayed, either by the district court or the court of appeals, at least when the state requested a stay.....

It is true that the Supreme Court declined to issue a stay in a more recent case in which a district court in Oregon enjoined enforcement of that state’s ban on same-sex marriage. National Organization for Marriage v. Geiger .... (June 4, 2014). However, that order is not instructive because the district court’s injunction was not opposed by the state; rather, a nonparty had requested the stay. Thus, I do not interpret Geiger as undermining the Court’s order in Herbert.

Yesterday's Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reports on the decision.

De Blasio's Universal Kindergarten Church-State Rules Unsatisfactory To Both Sides

In New York City, Mayor Bill de Blasio has created a free, full-day pre-kindergarten program, offered in part through community-based organizations, as a major initiative. (Implementation Plan.) Hamodia reported last month that the mayor has made a number of concessions in order to attract Orthodox Jewish schools to participate in the program. The New York Daily News reported yesterday that the New York Civil Liberties Union is concerned that some of these cross the church-state separation line:

Guidance provided to religious schools by city officials in May allows them to screen potential teachers based on their religion “to the extent permitted by law,” use religious texts “when presented objectively” and give lessons in other languages such as Yiddish and Hebrew.

Nevertheless, according to The Forward yesterday a number of ultra-Orthodox schools may opt not to participate in the program.  They are particularly concerned about the ban on staff leading blessings after meals, and about the length of the required school day which will make it difficult to add hours for religious instruction at the beginning or end of the school day. Regulations for a similar program offered by New York state outside of New York City are more flexible, and some New York City Jewish schools are looking at whether they can apply to this program instead.

European Court Faults Russia For Dissolving Pentecostal Church

In Biblical Centre of the Chuvash Republic v. Russia, (ECHR 1st Section, June 12, 2014), the European Court of Human Rights in a Chamber Judgment held that Russia violated Art. 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights (freedom of thought, conscience and religion) interpreted in light of Art. 11 (freedom of assembly and association) when it ordered dissolution of a Pentecostal religious organization.  In a press release, the Court summarized the facts:

The applicant is a Russian religious organisation, the Biblical Centre of the Evangelical (Pentecostal) Christians of the Chuvash Republic. Belonging to the Pentecostal movement of the Christian faith, it was registered as a religious organisation in November 1991, founding a Biblical college and Sunday school in 1996. However, following inspections of the Biblical Centre in April and May 2007, the domestic courts ruled against the applicant organisation in two sets of administrative proceedings for allowing the Centre to conduct educational activities without authorisation and for violating sanitary rules and hygienic requirements. On that basis, the Supreme Court upheld the prosecuting authorities’ claim to dissolve the applicant organisation in August 2007 and, following the dismissal of the organisation’s appeal in October 2007, it was dissolved with immediate effect.

In its decision, the Court held:

the domestic authorities have not shown that the dissolution, which undermined the very substance of the applicant organisation’s rights to freedom of religion and association, was the only option for the fulfilment of the aims they pursued.

An ACLJ press release reports on the decision.

Christian-Themed Park Turns Down State Economic Grant After Church-State Complaints

In Sioux City, Iowa, developers of a Christian-themed park have decided to turn down a $140,000 state economic development grant after objections were raised by the Freedom From Religion Foundation.  AP reported this week that developers of Shepherd's Garden do not want to be in the middle of lawsuits over the park. While the park is to include a stone path with Bible verses, and prayer spaces, the funding from the state organization, Vision Iowa, was not to go to religious elements of the park.  A member of the park's board said that FFRF's objections stimulated enough private donors to pay for the project.

Consent Decree Entered In Suit Over Devotional Exercises In School

The American Humanist Association yesterday announced the entry of a consent decree which settles its lawsuit against a Missouri school district.  AHA sued the district over devotional exercises held before the beginning of school in the classroom of a teacher who is adviser to the Christian student group. (See prior posting.) The consent decree (full text) in American Humanist Association v. Fayette R-III School District, (WD MO, May 19, 2014) requires the school district to amend its Student-Teacher Handbook in various ways and provides other relief.  As summarized in AHA's press release:

In the consent decree agreed upon by the parties, the school is permanently enjoined from promoting prayer and religious activity, and religious clubs will be given no special privileges that other clubs do not enjoy. The school district also agreed to amend its announcement policies so that they will not identify any religious activities taking place at student group meetings. Also, faculty sponsors of student groups will not be permitted to participate in religious activities of the groups. School employees will also no longer be allowed to keep religious materials in places in open view.

European Court Upholds Spain's Dismissal of Priest As Public School Teacher

In Martinez v. Spain, (ECHR, June 12, 2014), the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights, in a 9-8 decision, held that there had not been a violation of a Catholic priest's rights under Art. 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights when he was not renewed as teacher of Catholic religion and ethics in a State secondary school in Spain.  Art. 8 deals with respect for private and family life.

The priest, Fr. Jose Martinez, was ordained in 1961.  He applied for a dispensation from celibacy in 1984, but when he did not receive a response by the following year he married in a civil ceremony. He and his wife had 5 children.  Martinez taught in a state high school from 1991 until 1997 when the Vatican granted his dispensation from celibacy, but at the same time ruled that he could no longer teach religion in a state school unless the local bishop decided otherwise. The Vatican's ruling obligated his removal from his position in the state school pursuant to an agreement between Spain and the Holy See. This ruling followed publication of an article in a Spanish newspaper about the "Movement for Optional Celibacy of Priests" in which Martinez was an active member. The article, illustrated with a picture of Martinez and his family, quoted members' views on abortion, divorce, sexuality and contraception which were contrary to those of the Church.

The court said in part:

the applicant ... must have been aware, in accepting the task of teaching Catholic religion, of the potential consequences of the heightened duty of loyalty vis-à-vis the Catholic Church by which he thus became bound, for the purpose, in particular, of preserving the credibility of his teaching....

Focusing on the Church's rights of autonomy, the court said:

the right of believers to freedom of religion encompasses the expectation that they will be allowed to associate freely, without arbitrary State intervention. The autonomous existence of religious communities is indispensable for pluralism in a democratic society and is thus an issue at the very heart of the protection which Article 9 of the Convention affords.

Four separate dissenting opinions were also filed. The Court also issued a press release summarizing the 65 pages of decisions. The Becket Fund issued a press release on the decision applauding the vindication of church autonomy and criticizing the dissent by Judge Dedov that strongly takes issue with the Catholic Church's rules on celibacy for priests.

Groups Ask Holder To Withdraw Memo Allowing Religious Hiring Preferences In Federal Grant Programs

This week, 90 religious, educational, civil rights, labor, LGBT, women’s, and health groups signed a joint letter (full text) to Attorney General Eric Holder asking that the Office of Legal Counsel withdraw the Bush Administration's June 29,  2007 memo allowing faith-based organization that receive federal grant funds to give a preference to co-religionists in hiring. That memo concluded that RFRA overrides the religious anti-discrimination provisions of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (see prior posting). However, according this week's joint letter, the OLC memo has been applied to other grant programs as well, including most recently to grants under the Violence Against Women Act.  A Department of Justice  Frequently Asked Questions memo dated April 9, 2014 says that the non-discrimination grant provision in the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 does not apply to hiring of co-religionists by faith-based organizations where the funded program is an exercise of religion, foregoing a religious preference in hiring would be a substantial burden, and the funding agency cannot show a compelling interest furthered by the least restrictive means.  This week's letter argues:

RFRA should not be interpreted or employed as a tool for broadly overriding statutory protections against religious discrimination or to create a broad free exercise right to receive government grants without complying with applicable regulations that protect taxpayers.

[Thanks to Michael Lieberman for the lead.]

British Supreme Court: Civil Courts May Decide Religious Doctrine To Settle Legal Disputes

In Shergill & Ors v Khaira & Ors, (UK Sup. Ct., June 11, 2014) the United Kingdom Supreme Court held that British courts should not treat religious disputes as non-justiciable "where the determination of the dispute is necessary in order to decide a matter of disputed legal right...."  The case involves a dispute over who are the proper trustees in three Sikh temples and the powers which trustees may exercise.  The Supreme Court held in part:

... courts do not adjudicate on the truth of religious beliefs or on the validity of particular rites. But where a claimant asks the court to enforce private rights and obligations which depend on religious issues, the judge may have to determine such religious issues as are capable of objective ascertainment. The court addresses questions of religious belief and practice where its jurisdiction is invoked either to enforce the contractual rights of members of a community against other members or its governing body or to ensure that property held on trust is used for the purposes of the trust....

... the court may have to adjudicate upon matters of religious doctrine and practice in order to determine who are the trustees entitled to administer the trusts. Subject to further amendment of the parties’ cases, the question whether Sant Jeet Singh has power to appoint and dismiss trustees may depend on issues such as (i) what are the fundamental tenets of the First Holy Saint and the Nirmal sect, (ii) what is the nature of the institution at Nirmal Kutia in India, (iii) what steps or formalities were needed for a person to become the successor of the First Holy Saint, and (iv) in relation to the fourth issue whether the teachings and personal qualities of Sant Jeet Singh comply with the fundamental religious aims and purposes of the trust....

[Thanks to Law & Religion UK for the lead.]

USCIRF Criticizes Burma's Proposed Religious Conversion Law

The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom issued a press release yesterday strongly criticizing the draft of the Religious Conversion Law that Burma's Parlisment has recently released for comment. USCIRF said in part:

“The draft conversion law is irreparably flawed and would contravene Burma’s international commitments to protect freedom of religion or belief.  Such a law has no place in the 21st century, and we urge that it be withdrawn,” said USCIRF Chairman Robert George.  “This draft law, and the three others that may follow, risk stoking continuing violence and discrimination against Muslims and other religious minorities, including Christians.”

The draft conversion law would create a governmental Registration Board to approve all religious conversions.  While stating that “everyone has the freedom to convert from one religion to another,” the draft law would create a system clearly geared to discourage conversion.  

6th Circuit Upholds ACA Contraceptive Mandate Accommodation For Religious Non-Profits

In Michigan Catholic Conference v. Burwell, (6th Cir., June 11, 2014), the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals denied preliminary injunctions to several Catholic non-profit entities that object to the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage accommodation.  The accommodation allows charitable and educational non-profits to opt out of furnishing contraceptive coverage to their employees by completing a form and sending it to their insurer or third party administrator which will then furnishes contraceptive coverage directly. The court rejected arguments by the non-profits that the accommodation rules substantially burden their religious exercise under RFRA.  The court said in part:

appellants appear to ask the court to defer not only to their belief that requesting the exemption or the accommodation makes them complicit in sin, but also to defer to their understanding of how the regulatory measure actually works....  [W]e will independently determine what the regulatory provisions require and whether they impose a substantial burden on appellants’ exercise of religion....

Submitting the self-certification form to the insurance issuer or third-party administrator does not “trigger” contraceptive coverage; it is federal law that requires the insurance issuer or the third-party administrator to provide this coverage.... The government’s imposition of an independent obligation on a third party does not impose a substantial burden on the appellants’ exercise of religion.

The court also rejected plaintiffs' free speech, free exercise and Establishment Clause challenges. Finally the Court rejected plaintiffs' claim that the contraceptive coverage mandate violates the Weldon Amendment designed to allow health care entities to refuse to perform or cover abortions. Plaintiffs contend that certain of the contraceptive methods covered are abortifacients.  The Court refused to defer the plan provider's definition of abortion, saying:

the federal courts will utilize traditional methods of statutory interpretation to determine whether “abortion” in the Weldon Amendment includes FDA-approved emergency contraceptives.

The 6th Circuit also lifted its previously issued stays pending appeal of the lower courts' decisions in the case.  MLive reports on the decision.

Lawyers In British Columbia Want Trinity Western Law School Rejected

In Canada, British Columbia-based Trinity Western, a Christian liberal arts university, has suffered a setback in its efforts to open a law school in 2016. The school is controversial because of the university's "community covenant" which requires staff, faculty and students to refrain, among other things, from sex outside of heterosexual marriage.  As previously reported, earlier this year the benchers of the Law Society of British Columbia voted to approve the proposed law school, making its graduates eligible to enter the Law Society's bar admissions program. Subsequently, however, over 1,000 British Columbia lawyers petitioned the Law Society to allow a vote of the entire membership on the issue.  Canadian Press reports that an advisory vote of the general membership was held on Tuesday and lawyers voted 3,210 to 968 for a resolution calling for the benchers to reject the school. Trinity Western is already in the process of suing law societies in Ontario and Nova Scotia which have refused to approve the school's graduates for bar admission. (See prior posting.)

EEOC Sues Claiming Company Required Employees To Engage In Religious Activities

The EEOC announced yesterday that it has filed suit yesterday in a New York federal district court against Syosset, N.Y.-based United Health Programs of America and its parent corporation for forcing employees to take part in religious activities in the workplace.  According to the EEOC, since 2007 employees have been required to participate in:

group prayers, candle burning, and discussions of spiritual texts. The religious practices are part of a belief system that the defendants' family member created, called "Onionhead." Employees were told wear Onionhead buttons, pull Onionhead cards to place near their work stations and keep only dim lighting in the workplace. None of these practices was work-related. When employees opposed taking part in these religious activities or did not participate fully, they were terminated.

New York Daily News has more on the lawsuit.

Jewish Ancestry of the Late Cardinal John Joseph O'Connor Discovered

The New York Times reported at length yesterday on the newly-discovered Jewish ancestry of the the late Cardinal John Joseph O’Connor.  O'Connor was Cardinal Archbishop of New York for 16 years. It now appears that O'Connor's maternal grandfather was a rabbi, and his mother, who converted to Catholicism in 1908, was born a Jew.  The Cardinal, who apparently never learned of his Jewish roots, was born in 1920 and died in 2000. (Biography.) As Cardinal, O'Connor was strongly supportive of the Jewish community and active in Catholic-Jewish relations.

House Subcommittee Holds Hearing On Religious Liberty In U.S.

Yesterday the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice held a hearing on The State of Religious Liberty In the United States.  Witnesses from Liberty Counsel, Christian Legal Society, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and Alliance Defending Freedom testified.  The full text of each witness' prepared remarks is available online, as is a video of the full hearing.

UPDATE: Christian News (June 11) carries an account of an exchange during the hearing between Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert and Americans United leader Rev. Barry Lynn questioning Lynn's Christian beliefs.

DC Circuit Dismisses Suit By Former Gitmo Detainees Claiming Disruption of Religious Practices

In Allaithi v. Rumsfeld, (DC Cir., June 10, 2014), former Guantanamo detainees brought a damage action under the Alien Tort Statute, as well as under the 1st Amendment and RFRA, against various individuals who authorized and supervised their detention.  At issue in this appeal is the claim by certain of the plaintiffs that after they were cleared by the Combatant Status Review Tribunal, but before they were released, they were mistreated in various ways, including disruption of their religious practices. The appeals court agreed with the district court that the individual defendants were acting within the scope of their employment in carrying out the challenged actions.  Therefore the claims should have been brought against the United States government pursuant to 28 USC Sec. 2679(d), and not against the individuals. Center for Constitutional Rights issued a press release discussing the decision.

Another Lawsuit Is Filed Challenging Alabama's Refusal To Recognize Same-Sex Marriages

On Monday, the ACLU filed a federal lawsuit challenging Alabama's refusal to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. (Press release). The complaint (full text) in Aaron-Brush v. Bentley, (ND AL, June 9, 2014), was filed on behalf of two women who have been together for 17 years and were legally married in Massachusetts in 2012. They have a 7-year old daughter they are raising together, though Alabama law presently bars them from jointly adopting her.  There are already three other lawsuits in federal courts seeking to require Alabama to recognize same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions.

Kentucky City Passes Ordinance Barring LGBT Discrimination, But With Broad Exemption For Faith-Based Institutions

According to Central Kentucky News, on Monday night, the Danville, Kentucky City Commission, by a vote of 4-1, adopted an ordinance barring discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, but with a broad exclusion for all "faith-based institutions."  An earlier version of the ordinance would not have excluded faith-based institutions that receive a majority of their funding from government agencies.  However last month after Sunrise Children's Services which receives 80% of its funding from the government threatened to sue, Council came up with the new draft containing the broader exemption.  An attempt to go back to the initial version was defeated on Monday by a vote of 3-2.  Mayor Bernie Hunstad, who voted against the final version as well, said that he objects to special protection for individuals "who chose to make an unconventional choice in their method of sexual practices."