Egyptian Court Dissolves Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party

In Egypt yesterday, the Supreme Administrative Court ordered dissolution of the Freedom and Justice Party, the political wing of the Muslim Brotherhood. Reuters and BBC News report that the decision, which excludes the party from running candidates in future elections, calls for seizure of the party's assets by the state. The government's Committee of Political Party Affairs had accused the FJP of irregularities. Among other things, police found that the party's headquarters had been used to store weapons. The court's decision may not be appealed. FJP's parent Muslim Brotherhood was banned and its assets were confiscated by court order last year. (See prior posting.)

New York City Health Department Orders 2 Mohels To Stop Controversial Circumcision Method After Infections

The Forward reported this week that the New York City Health Department has prohibited two mohels from performing Jewish religious circumcisions using the direct oral suction method (metzitzah b’peh) after infant boys allegedly contracted herpes infections from the two. The Health Department refuses to name the mohels  for privacy reasons.  New York City Health Department regulations adopted in 2012 require mohels to obtain written informed consent before using the controversial method for a circumcision. (See prior posting.) Only one of the two mohels targeted by the Health Department was able to produce the consent form for the infected infant.

Suit Claims Rabbi Sexually Assaulted Students At His Israeli Schools For Girls

Courthouse News Service and JTA report on a class action lawsuit filed last Monday in federal district court in Illinois against Rabbi Elimelech Meisels, his four Orthodox Jewish seminaries in Israel, the U.S. fundraising arm of the schools, and other alleged co-conspirators.  The lawsuit, alleging racketeering, fraud, breach of contract, emotional distress, conspiracy and conversion, claims that Meisels induced parents in the U.S. to send their daughters to his high-tuition seminaries where he would sexually assault the girls after developing mentorship relations with them. It is alleged that he kept his victims quiet in part by threatening to ruin their reputations and their chances for an appropriate marriage candidate. A Chicago Jewish religious court that learned of the problems urged parents not to send their children to the schools. The complaint alleges that at that point Meisels engaged in a sham sale of the seminaries to try to retain students.

Ten Commandments On City Hall Lawn Violates Establishment Clause

In Felix v. City of Bloomfield, (D NM, Aug. 7, 2014), in a decision described by the court as "a very close case," a New Mexico federal district court held that a 5-foot tall Ten Commandments monument on the lawn in front of the Bloomfield, New Mexico municipal building violates the Establishment Clause. The monument was constructed on city property by a former member of city council under a city council policy on the placement of monuments on the city lawn. Summarizing its 32-page decision, the court said:

a. Plaintiffs have Article III standing because they have regular, direct, and unwelcome contact with the Ten Commandments monument and therefore have suffered an “injury-in-fact”.... 

b. The Ten Commandments monument is government speech ... because the ... monument is a permanent object located on government property and it is not part of a designated public forum open to all on equal terms.

c. In view of the circumstances surrounding the context, history, and purpose of the Ten Commandments monument, it is clear that the City of Bloomfield has violated the Establishment Clause because its conduct in authorizing the continued display of the monument on City property has had the primary or principal effect of endorsing religion.

Suit Challenging Hebrew National Hot Dog Advertising Is Back In State Court

American Jewish World reports at length on the July 31 Minnesota state trial court hearing on a motion to dismiss in a long-running lawsuit against the manufacturer of Hebrew National hot dogs.  The suit, which alleges that ConAgra Food's advertising was deceptive because some of the meat in the hot dogs did not meet the proper standards for kosher slaughter, was remanded to state court by the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals last April. (See prior posting.) Prior decisions in the case have focused on whether the 1st Amendment bars the court from determining proper standards of kosher slaughter, and on whether any particular consumer can prove that the hot dogs he or she ate contained non-kosher meat.  At the conclusion of the hearing, the court asked the lawyers to file briefs on the issue of standing to bring the suit under consumer protection laws.

Bankruptcy Court, Applying Ministerial Exception, Rejects Defrocked Priest's Claim

In In re Archdiocese of Milwaukee, (ED WI Bankr., Aug. 6, 2014), a federal bankruptcy court held that the ministerial exception doctrine requires dismissal of a claim by by a defrocked Catholic priest for back pay and related amounts.  Marvin Thomas Knighton filed the claim in the bankruptcy reorganization of the Milwaukee Archdiocese, alleging that he was removed from the ministry after a canonical trial even though a state court jury found him not guilty of second degree sexual assault of a child. The court said in part:

[T]he First and Fourteenth Amendments permit hierarchical religious organizations to establish their own rules and regulations for internal discipline and government, and to create tribunals for adjudicating disputes over these matters. When this choice is exercised and ecclesiastical tribunals are created to decide disputes over the government and direction of subordinate bodies, the Constitution requires that civil courts accept their decisions as binding upon them.... Accordingly, this Court cannot second-guess whether the Debtor followed applicable law - whether Canon Law or federal employment discrimination law - in terminating or failing to compensate Mr. Knighton.

The court also found that the claim was barred by the statute of limitations and additionally rejected Knighton's suggestions of racial discrimination.

U.S. Drops Supplies To Yazidi Stranded In Iraq After Islamic State Attack

U.S. cargo planes yesterday dropped supplies to some 40,000 members of the Yazidi sect in Iraq who have fled the town of Sinjar after it was taken over by the insurgent group Islamic State (known variously as IS, ISIS or ISIL). The Yazidi follow an ancient religion that is related to Zoroastrianism. More than 100,000 Yazidi have fled northern Iraqi towns taken over by IS, and some 40,000 of them remain stranded on Mount Sinjar.  In a statement last night (full text), President Obama said:

ISIL forces ... have called for the systematic destruction of the entire Yezidi people, which would constitute genocide. 

Fox News and the Los Angeles Times have additional details.

In a related development, Reuters reports that on Wednesday an air strike by the Iraqi government targeted a Sharia court set up in the city of Mosul by IS. Sixty people were killed, including the judge.

Suit Against FLDS Towns Over Utility Denials Is Settled

Last March, an Arizona federal court jury awarded damages of nearly $5.3 million to Ronald and Jinjer Cooke who sued claiming religious discrimination after towns controlled by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints in 2008 denied them access to water, sewers and electricity for the home they were building. They claimed that Hilldale, Utah and Colorado City, Arizona refused them utility service because they are not FLDS members. (See prior posting.) Reuters reported yesterday that the litigation has now been settled and the court has dismissed the case. The financial terms of the settlement were not disclosed. The couple now has utility services from the cities.

6th Circuit Hears Oral Arguments In Same-Sex Marriage Cases

The U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday heard oral arguments in same-sex marriage cases from 4 states.  Here are links to the audio of the argument in each case:

• Michigan: DeBoer v. Snyder (Oral argument)
• Ohio: Obergefell v. Himes; Henry v. Himes (Oral argument).
• Kentucky: Bourke v. Beshar; Love v. Beshar (Oral argument).
• Tennessee: Tanco v. Haslem (Oral argument).

Detroit Free Press and MLive reported on the oral arguments.

Opponents of Houston's Equal Rights Ordinance Sue After Referendum Petitions Rejected

In May, Houston, Texas City Council passed an Equal Rights Ordinance that attracted significant opposition because of its ban on discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. (See prior posting.) Opponents have been circulating petitions to get a repeal referendum on the ballot. On Monday, the city ruled that there were insufficient valid signatures on the petitions.  As reported by the Houston Chronicle, strict city rules disqualify entire pages of signatures when those collecting them are not registered voters or did not themselves sign the petition.  On Tuesday, opponents of the ordinance filed suit in state court challenging the procedure used to disqualify signatures-- city attorneys eliminated numerous names after the City Secretary had initially determined that there were sufficient signatures. The lawsuit sought an immediate injunction against enforcement of the Equal Rights Ordinance. In response, the city has removed the lawsuit to federal court on the ground that one paragraph of the complaint raises a federal claim of interference with the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Houston Chronicle says that opponents of the Ordinance see this as a delaying tactic to prevent a state court injunction from being issued.

Rules Limiting Area Around State Fair Where Preacher Can Speak Upheld

In Powell v. Noble, (SD IA, Aug. 5, 2014), an Iowa federal district court in a 40-page opinion refused to issue a preliminary injunction in a Christian preacher's challenge to rules barring his proselytizing in areas around the Iowa State Fair where he might impede traffic flow. The court held preliminarily that the entire Fairgrounds are a limited public forum, at least  during the days the Fair is held.  Restrictions on activities that could impede traffic flow are reasonable. However the court did enjoin defendants from arresting plaintiff (or threatening arrest) solely for protected speech in locations where Defendants conceded there was not interference with traffic flow. Des Moines Register reports on the decision.

Utah Files First Cert Petition In Same-Sex Marriage Challenges

The state of Utah-- acting 6 weeks before its deadline-- yesterday became the first to file a petition for certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court in the growing number of decisions striking down state bans on same sex-marriage. The petition (full text) in Herbert v. Kitchen urges Supreme Court review of the 10th Circuit's 2-1 decision (see prior posting), saying in part:

This case presents an immensely important question: whether the United States Constitution compels states to adopt a single marriage policy that every individual is allowed “to marry the person of their choice.”... The Tenth Circuit said yes and struck down Utah’s definition—statutorily enacted and adopted into the Utah Constitution by two-thirds of voters in a statewide referendum—that marriage is only between a man and a woman. That ruling deprives Utah citizens of the “fundamental right” to “act through a lawful electoral process,” ... and ignores that the Constitution says nothing about how states must define marriage.

Salt Lake Tribune reports on the filing, and SCOTUS Blog has more background.

NYC Pre-Kindergarten Funding Requires Religious Schools To Draw Fine Church-State Lines

The New York Times reported Monday on the fine church-state lines being drawn by religious schools hosting Mayor de Blasio's government-funded pre-kindergarten programs. Brief guidelines issued to the schools allow the teaching of culture, but not religion. Religious texts may be presented objectively as part of a secular program of instruction.  The Times describes the accommodation reached by some schools:

The biblical story of Noah’s Ark will be taught, without mention of who told Noah to build it. Challah, the Jewish bread eaten on the Sabbath, will be baked, but no blessings said over it. Some crucifixes will be removed, but others left hanging.

(See prior related posting.) [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

District Court Says Town of Greece Decision Does Not Cover Invocations Offered Directly By County Board Members

After the U.S. Supreme Court decided the Town of Greece case last May, a number of local governments that had been enjoined by lower courts from opening council meetings with sectarian prayers petitioned lower courts to dissolve or modify the injunctions.  One of these was Pittsylvania County, Virginia. However, in Hudson v. Pittsylvania County, Virginia, (WD VA, Aug. 4, 2014), the federal district court held that while it was willing to modify its prior injunction, it would not dissolve it:

... unlike in Town of Greece, where invited clergy and laypersons offered the invocations, the Board members themselves led the prayers in Pittsylvania County. Thus, in contrast to Town of Greece, where the town government had no role in determining the content of the opening invocations at its board meetings, the government of Pittsylvania County itself, embodied in its elected Board members, dictated the content of the prayers opening official Board meetings. Established as it was by the Pittsylvania County government, that content was consistently grounded in the tenets of one faith. Further, because the Pittsylvania County Board members themselves served as exclusive prayer providers, persons of other faith traditions had no opportunity to offer invocations.

While the court was willing to modify the injunction to make it consistent with Town of Greece, it concluded it did not have jurisdiction to do so until the 4th Circuit to which the case had been appealed granted at least a limited remand. AP reports on the decision.

Trial Court Invalidates Florida's Ban On Recognizing Same-Sex Civil Unions

Tampa Bay Times reports that in a ruling on Monday, a Broward County, Florida trial court judge invalidated the 2008 amendment to the Florida Constitution that prohibits recognition of any "legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof." The ruling comes in a case in which plaintiff  Heather Brassner asked the Florida court to dissolve her same-sex Vermont civil union. The court concluded that it could not do so without first ruling on the constitutionality of Florida's same-sex marriage ban. After ruling, the court immediately stayed the order, pending appeal. This is the third Florida trial court ruling since July invalidating Florida's same-sex marriage ban. (See prior posting.) Yesterday's opinion in Brassner v. Lade does not appear to be available online yet, but here is the full text of plaintiff's motion for a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief.

Judge Refuses To Recuse Himself On Charges That Jewish Charitable Activities Bias Him In Immigration Trial

The Chicago Sun-Times reports on a decision last week by Michigan federal district court judge Paul Borman in which he angrily refused to recuse himself in the trial of a Palestinian woman charged with hiding her terrorism-related past in coming to the U.S. and applying for U.S. citizenship. Defendant Rasmieh Odeh failed to disclose the fact that she had spent 10 years in prison in Israel after being convicted of taking part in two terrorist bombings in Jerusalem. Her lawyers claim that Judge Borman's long history of support and fund-raising for the Detroit Jewish Federation and his organizing trips to Israel bias him and likely gave him extra-judicial information relevant to defendant's claim that she was beaten and raped while in Israeli custody.  In United States v. Odeh, (ED MI, July 31, 2014), Judge Borman wrote:

My relationship to my faith and my heritage through my activity on behalf of the Detroit Jewish Federation, reads nothing like the innuendo and rank speculation that infects Defendant’s motion.

Report Focuses On Expensive Homes of U.S. Catholic Archbishops

CNN yesterday published an investigative report titled "The Lavish Homes of American Archbishops." The investigation found that 10 of the 34 active U.S. Catholic archbishops live in buildings worth more than $1 million.

Documents Reveal Current IRS Procedures On Church Tax Inquiries

In 2012, the Internal Revenue Service temporarily suspended tax audits of churches accused of violating Section 501(c)(3)'s ban on political participation, pending final adoption of IRS rule changes to clarify which high level Treasury official has authority to make a determination under IRC Sec. 7611 that there are reasonable grounds to begin a church tax inquiry. (See prior posting.) The proposed rules have never been adopted in final form, but as was reported last month, in settling a lawsuit challenging the suspension of church tax inquiries, the IRS assured the Freedom From Religion Foundation that it has adopted procedures for reviewing, evaluating and determining whether to initiate church investigations.

As pointed out yesterday by The Blaze, from a letter attached to the FFRF's Memorandum In Support of Motion To Dismiss, a good deal can be learned of the practices which the IRS now uses. A decision to begin a church tax inquiry is "made by the Commissioner, TEGE, either directly or as concurrence to the determination made by the Director, Exempt Organizations." Complaints about violations of the political intervention ban are evaluated by the Review of Operations unit, and then by the Political Activities Referral Committee.  That process has led to the conclusion that 99 churches merit a high priority examination for activities since 2010.

Dispute Over Authority To Fire Minister Dismissed Under Ecclesiastical Abstention Doctrine

In Anderson v. Truelove, (TX App., July 31, 2014), a Texas appellate court invoked the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine to dismiss a lawsuit brought by Jamall Anderson, the minister of a small 16-member church.  At issue was whether two members who claimed to be a majority of the trustees of the church could dismiss Anderson as minister for taking church funds in order to pay expenses for his sick mother. Two meetings of members-- called without the required days advance notice-- had agreed to forgive Anderson and retain him. The court held that it could not apply the neutral principles approach to decide the dispute because the church's bylaws do not contain any provisions regarding removal of the minister.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Klaus Prettner & Holger Strulik, It's a Sin - Contraceptive Use, Religious Beliefs, and Long-Run Economic Development, (Discussion Papers on Business and Economics, University of Southern Denmark, 11/2014).
• David Nelken, Rules of Forgiveness and the Role of Narratives in Talmudic Law, (in Alison Diduck, Noam Peleg and Helen Reece eds. Law and Michael Freeman, Brill, 2014 (shortened version)).
• Benjamin Boyd, Take Your Guns to Church: The Second Amendment and Church Autonomy, (Liberty University Law Review, Volume 8, Number 3 (Summer 2014). 
• Erin Morrow Hawley, The Jurisdictional Question in Hobby Lobby, (Yale Law Journal Forum (Fall 2014)).
• Peter Jenkins, Absolutist, Pragmatist and Realist Approaches to Research Ethics in the Digital Humanities: The Case of the Schneerson Collection, (Cultural Research in the Context of Digital Humanities, (Saint Petersburg: Asterion Press, 2013)).
• Christopher McCrudden, Faith-Based Non-Governmental Organizations in the Public Square, (June 30, 2014).
• Rayan Haykal, Acceptability of Civil Marriage in a Multidenominational Society: Results of an Empirical Survey in Lebanon, (July 11, 2014).