Today Is Religious Freedom Day

Today is Religious Freedom Day, the anniversary of the passage of the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom in 1786.  Each year the President issues a Proclamation marking the day, and presumably this year's Proclamation will appear sometime today on the White House website. Americans United has urged that greater attention be given to the day. UPDATE: Here is the full text of this year's Presidential Proclamation-- Religious Freedom Day 2015.

Meanwhile, according to CNS News, the Orange County, Florida public schools announced that they are suspending, at least temporarily, the traditional passive distribution of Bibles from World Changers of Florida on Religious Freedom Day.  The decision came after last year the Freedom For Religion Foundation won the right to distribute its own atheist litereature, including a pamphlet titled "Sex and Obscenity in the Bible," and this year the Satanic Temple indicated it would distribute material as well. The school district says that it is reworking its policy on outside distribution of materials to students.

8th Circuit Dismisses Factional Dispute Over Control of Hutterite Colony

In Hutterville Hutterian Brethren, Inc. v. Sveen, (8th Cir., Jan. 13, 2015), the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed a lawsuit growing out of the long dispute between two factions over control of a South Dakota Hutterite colony. State courts refused to resolve the issue of control, finding that to do so would require civil courts to decide issue of religious doctrine.  A federal court action was then filed on behalf of the colony (a non-profit corporation) by the Waldner faction. The suit was brought against the attorneys representing the colony charging, among other things, breach of fiduciary and ethical duties in creating a sham legal dispute that allowed them to side with the competing Wipf faction. The 8th Circuit held that since the Waldners in the state court proceedings convinced the courts that they should not decide the case because it involved issues of religious doctrine, they are now estopped from claiming that the religious questions involved are a sham.

EEOC Sues Over Refusal To Accommodate Rastafarian Employee's Beliefs

The EEOC has announced that on Tuesday it filed a federal lawsuit against Raleigh, North Carolina-based Triangle Catering, LLC for failing to accommodate a new employee's religious beliefs.  The company refused to permit Michael Reddick, Jr., a practicing Rastafarian, to wear a small cap while working as a delivery truck driver. Reddick was eventually fired for insisting on wearing the religious head covering.

Indian State of Goa Plans Program To "Treat" LGBT Youths

The New York Times reported this week that the Indian state of Goa is planning to set up "camps" to treat gay, bisexual and transgender young people to rid them of their sexual orientations.  Ramesh Tawadkar, the state's Minister for Sports and Youth Affairs, says the program, which will involve a well-known yoga guru, will teach LGBT youths how to experience "the true pleasures and bliss of life." Same-sex relations are illegal in India.

Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments In Title VII Case

The United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments yesterday in a Title VII employment discrimination case.  The question presented in Mach Mining, LLC v. EEOC is whether and to what extent a court can enforce the EEOC’s statutorily required duty to conciliate discrimination claims before filing suit.  The transcript of the oral arguments is available from the Court's website. SCOTUSBlog's case page containing links to all the briefs in the case as well as to the 7th Circuit's opinion below is here. The Washington Post reports on the oral arguments.  While the case involves charges of gender discrimination, the result will impact religious discrimination cases as well.

Minister Sues Michigan For Right To Perform Same-Sex and Polygamous Marriages

In Michigan, a Detroit minister filed a federal court lawsuit on Monday against the state's governor and attorney general alleging that the state is violating his religious freedom by barring him from performing same-sex and polygamous marriages.  According to the Detroit News, in the suit plaintiff Rev. Neil Patrick Carrick alleges that he has declined requests to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies because under Michigan law it is a crime punishable by up to a $500 fine to knowingly do so.

After Charlie Attack, Media Responsiveness To Religious Sensiivities Is Still An Issue

In the aftermath of last week's terrorist massacre at Charlie Hebdo offices in Paris, it has become clear that the issue of the appropriate media response to religious sensibilities remains unresolved.  Two stories show the ongoing problem. Haaretz yesterday strongly criticized the ultra-Orthodox Israeli paper HaMevaser for publishing only a photoshopped version of the iconic photo of world leaders walking arm-in-arm in the Paris rally for free speech and religious liberty.  Like many ultra-Orthodox papers, HaMevaser will not publish photos of women because of Jewish religious concerns about modesty.  In the photo of the Paris march, German Chancellor Angela Merkel  has been removed, as have other women leaders. [Thanks to Douglas Carver for the lead.]

Meanwhile mainstream news media split over whether to carry a photo of the defiant cover of the post-massacre issue of Charlie Hebdo.  As reported by Malaysia Chronicle, the cover shows Muhammad crying while holding up a "Je suis Charlie" sign. The drawing is captioned "Tout Est Pardonne" (All Is Forgiven). Outlets picturing the cover include the Malaysian Chronicle, Fox News, CBS News, the BBC, Germany's ARD, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, France's Liberation, Britain's The Guardian, The Wall Street Journal and USA Today. Among those choosing to merely describe the cover are CNN, NBC News, NPR, Britain's Daily Mail, The New York Times and the Associated Press. These media expressed concern not only about offending Muslims, but also about protecting their employees stationed around the world. German investigative journalist Gunter Wallraff said of those not showing the cover: "I don't call that sensitivity, I call it cowardice. If everyone follow that line, they [the Islamists] will have won."

Damage Award Against Diocese Reduced In In Vitro Fertilization Firing

In Herx v. Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend, Inc., (ND IN, Jan. 12, 2015), a federal judge reduced a jury's verdict against a Catholic diocese in a Title VII sex discrimination case from $1.95 million to $543,803.  The case, involving a suit by a Catholic school teacher fired for becoming pregnant through in vitro  fertilization, has been widely followed.  The reduction is largely the result of applying a $300,000 statutory cap on punitive and most compensatory damages imposed in employment discrimination cases by 42 USC 1981a(b). Yesterday's Fort Wayne Journal Gazette reports on the decision. (See prior related posting.)

3rd Circuit Hears Arguments In Muslim Challenge To NYPD Surveillance

Yesterday the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in Hassan v. City of New York. (Audio of full oral arguments.)  The case involves a constitutional challenge to the New York City Police Department's surveillance of the Muslim community in New Jersey following 9/11. The district court had dismissed the case both for lack of standing and failure to show intentional discrimination. (See prior posting.)  NorthJersey.com reports on the case.

French and Israeli Officials Display Some Tensions After Supermarket Terrorist Attack

While most of the media depicted the turnout of world leaders at the Paris march against terrorism on Sunday as a show of unity, there appears to be a continuing tension between French and Israeli officials in the wake of the fatal attack at a kosher supermarket.

First, in a Jan. 12 article, Haaretz reported that originally French officials asked both Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to stay away from the solidarity demonstration to avoid diverting attention to controversial issues such as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.  Originally both leaders agreed. But then when Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman and Economy Minister Naftali Bennett-- both Netanyahu rivals in the upcoming Israeli elections announced they would attend the Paris demonstration, Netanyahu changed his mind. This led French officials to then extend an invitation to Abbas as well.  French President Hollande showed his anger by leaving the Sunday evening ceremony at the Great Synagogue in Paris as Netanyahu was about to speak. (I24 News reports that Foreign Minister Liberman denied that the French asked Netanyahu not to attend the Paris demonstration.)

Additional tensions have been created by the statement of condolence that Prime Minister Netanyahu issued Saturday evening in which he welcomed French Jews to emigrate to Israel, suggesting a threat to Jewish safety in France. (See prior posting.) Even before the terrorist attack, there has been increasing French Jewish emigration to Israel.  Reacting to that earlier trend, The Atlantic in a Jan. 10 article reports that French Prime Minister Manuel Valls said: "[I]f 100,000 Jews leave, France will no longer be France. The French Republic will be judged a failure." Yesterday, according to the New York Times, the French Interior Minister said that 4,700 police officers would be sent to guard France's 700 Jewish schools and other institutions.

Then at the funeral in Israel today for the four victims of the Paris supermarket shooting, Israeli President Reuven Rivlin said: "We cannot allow that in 2015, 70 years since the end of World War II, Jews are afraid to walk in the streets of Europe with skullcaps and tzitzit." (The Local).

Canadian Court Rejects Claim For Damages For Breach of Ketubah

In Zalik v. Zalik, (BC Sup. Ct., Dec. 31, 2014), a British Columbia (Canada) trial court rejected a claim brought by a husband in a divorce proceeding seeking damages from his wife for her breach of their Ketubah (Jewish marriage contract).  The breach cited by the husband was a failure to maintain a lifetime marriage.  The court held that if the Ketubah contains a religious obligation to maintain a lifetime marriage, that obligation is inconsistent with the parties legal rights under Canada's Divorce Act. Metro News reports on the decision.

Court Dismisses Defamation Claims Against Church And Pastors By Excommunicated Plaintiffs

In Pfeil v. St. Matthews Evangelical Lutheran Church of the Unaltered Augsburg Confession of Worthington, (MN App., Jan. 12, 2015), a Minnesota state appellate court invoked the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine to dismiss a defamation suit brought against a church and its pastors by a couple who had been excommunicated for their criticism of the church's pastors.  Plaintiffs, an elderly couple, claim that statements made during a meeting of church members and before a synod review panel as part of the excommunication process injured their character and reputation in their small community. The court held, however, that:

any judicial inquiry into the truth of statements made during a church disciplinary proceeding would create an excessive entanglement with the church that would violate the First Amendment...

Developments In Marriage Equality Cases: Louisiana and South Dakota

There were two developments yesterday in the array of cases challenging same-sex marriage bans.  The U.S. Supreme Court denied the petition for direct review of a trial court decision in Robicheaux v. Devin, (Docket No. 14-596, cert. before judgment denied, Jan. 12, 2015) (Order List). The district court upheld Louisiana's same-sex marriage ban and the 5th Circuit last week heard oral arguments in the case. (See prior posting.)

Also yesterday in Rosenbrahn v. Daugaard, (D SD, Jan. 12, 2015), a federal district court held that  South Dakota's same-sex marriage ban violates the due process and equal protection clauses of the 14th Amendment.  However, the court stayed its injunction pending appeal to the 8th Circuit. Lyle Denniston at SCOTUSBlog reporting on the decision said:

Although most of Judge Schreier’s reasons for nullifying the South Dakota ban on Monday were familiar from other decisions, she was among the first to reject what has been a more recent claim by state officials: that is, that marriage is a domestic relations matter, and that federal courts have no jurisdiction over such matters.  There is such an exception, the Sioux Falls judge found, but that it does not go so far as to bar new constitutional claims against same-sex marriage bans.

Following the district court's decision, South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley reacted in a press release, saying in part: "It remains the State’s position that the institution of marriage should be defined by the voters of South Dakota and not the federal courts."

Transcript of Today's SCOTUS Arguments In Town of Gilbert Now Available

The full transcript of oral arguments today in Reed v. Town of Gilbert -- the case on regulation of church directional signs-- is now available.  SCOTUSBlog has an analysis of the arguments, saying in part:

Throughout the argument, Justices of differing philosophical leanings seemed skeptical of a one-size-fits-all First Amendment approach for judging sign ordinances.  That was the way they interpreted the argument of David A. Cortman of Lawrenceville, Georgia, representing the small Good News Community Church and its pastor, Clyde Reed.   No member of the Court appeared persuaded by his argument that, if a city allows more leeway for one kind of sign, the Constitution demands that all signs in any way similar be treated the same.

Dismissal of Atlanta Fire Chief Over Anti-Gay Book Riles Religious Conservatives

As reported by GA Voice, last week Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed dismissed Fire Chief Kelvin Cochran for publishing a book reflecting Cochran's anti-gay views, without discussing the matter with the mayor. Reed says that the publication is inconsistent with the city's policy that bars discrimination, among other things, on the basis of sexual orientation, and casts doubt on Cochran's ability to lead a diverse work force.  However yesterday's New York Times reports that the firing has generated a backlash:

[C]onservatives and religious organizations were outraged. The Georgia Baptist Convention has organized an online petition demanding that the firing be reversed. The evangelist Franklin Graham, in an opinion piece for a religious news site, called Mr. Cochran the “latest target of politically correct bullying against Bible-believing Christians.”

The firing may give impetus to a religious freedom bill that has again been proposed in the Georgia legislature. Summarizing the situation, Mayor Reed said:  "I hired him to put out fires. Not to create them."

Expanding Protestant Churches Face New Opposition From Chinese Government

Yesterday's Christian Science Monitor carried a long story on the rapid growth of Protestantism in China and the government's new moves to crack down on official as well as unofficial churches.  Here is an excerpt:

As evangelical Christianity grows sharply, officials fear it could undermine their authority. Already, Christians may outnumber members of the Communist Party. That has far-reaching implications both for Chinese society and for a party that frowns on unofficial gatherings and other viewpoints. In China, party members cannot be Christian.

More than half of China’s Protestants attend illegal “house churches” that meet privately. The rest go to one of China’s official, registered Protestant churches.... [which] operate under an arrangement that says in effect: We are patriotic, good citizens. We love China. We aren’t dissidents. We go to official theology schools. So the party will let us worship freely....

Yet in the past year authorities have attacked and even destroyed official Protestant churches, as well as unofficial ones. Many Evangelicals feel they are now on the front lines of an invisible battle over faith in the world’s most populous nation, and facing a campaign by the party-state to delegitimize them. Underneath it all is a question: Will China become a new fount of Christianity in the world, or the site of a growing clash between the party and the pulpit?

Consideration of Church's Location In Redistricting Does Not Violate Establishment Clause

Harris v. City of Texarkana, (WD AR, Jan. 9, 2015), is a challenge to the drawing of ward boundary lines in a city for election purposes after the 2010 census. While most of the opinion was devoted to rejecting plaintiff's Voting Rights Act challenge, plaintiff also raised an unusual Establishment Clause challenge.  In drawing ward lines, one of the members of the City Board of Directors requested that a particular church be kept within his ward. The court said:

In this case, there was no endorsement of any religion.... The alleged consideration of where the church fell within the ward boundaries was not an attempt to make religion relevant to a citizen’s standing within the community, and there is no evidence that the religion practiced by the members was a consideration.... The church was only relevant insofar as it had members who were of voting age who had a relationship with a member of the Board of Directors. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s First Amendment claims fails. 

Supreme Court Will Hear Arguments Today On Church's Challenge To Sign Ordinance

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments this morning in Reed v. Town of Gilbert.  (Argument calendar.) In the case, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 decision, upheld as content-neutral an Arizona town's sign ordinance that limits the display of directional signs.  The ordinance was challenged by a church that placed 17 signs in the area around its place of worship announcing the time and location of its services. (See prior posting.)  Here is the SCOTUSBlog's case page with links to all of the briefs in the case. and here is Lyle Denniston's preview of the arguments.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Marc Helbling & Richard Traunmüller, How State Support of Religion Shapes Attitudes Toward Muslim Immigrants. New Evidence from a Subnational Comparison, (January 6, 2015).
• Rim-Sarah Alouane, Bas Les Masques! Unveiling Muslim Women on Behalf of the Protection of Public Order: Reflections on the Legal Controversies Around a Novel Definition of 'Public Order' Used to Ban Full-Face Covering in France, (The Experiences of Face Veil Wearers in Europe and the Law (Ed: Eva Brems),Cambridge University Press, 2014, 194-205).
• Washim Ahmed, Old Wine in a New Bottle: Analyzing the Impacts of Polygamy Inadmissibility Under Bill S-7 on Immigration Law, (December 20, 2014).
• Markus Mättö & Mervi Niskanen, National Culture and Cross-Country Differences in Trade Credit, (January 4, 2015).
• Gregory Brazeal, Constitutional Fundamentalism, (January 8, 2015).
• Samuel D. Brunson, Dear I.R.S., It Is Time to Enforce the Campaigning Prohibition. Even Against Churches, (January 7, 2015).

Over Strong Dissent, 9th Circuit Denies En Banc Review of Marriage Equality Decisions

In Latta v. Otter, (9th Cir., Jan. 9, 2015), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to grant en banc review of a 3-judge panel's decision striking down same-sex marriage bans in Idaho and Nevada. (See prior posting.) Judge O'Scannlain, joined by Judges Rawlinson and Bea, filed a 25-page dissent to the denial of review, saying in part:

Nothing about the issue of same-sex marriage exempts it from the general principle that it is the right of the people to decide for themselves important issues of social policy.

SCOTUSBlog reports on the 9th Circuit's action, calling Judge O'Scannlain's opinion "one of the strongest dissenting statements yet ... on same-sex marriages."