Wednesday, August 19, 2015

7th Circuit: Rule Preventing Former Prison Employee From Marrying Inmate Is Unconstituitonal

In Riker v. Lemmon. (7th Cir., Aug. 14, 2015), the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals held that prison authorities had failed to adequately justify their refusal to allow Rebecca Riker, a former food services employee at an Indiana prison, a one-time visit in order to marry inmate Paul Vest who is serving a 50-year sentence for robbery.  Riker met Vest when she was employed at the prison and Vest worked as a prisoner under her supervision. Riker left her job when it was discovered that she had a romantic relationship with Vest, which included sexual intercourse in a walk-in cooler at the facility. Relying in part on the U.S. Supreme Court's 1987 decision in Turner v. Safley, the 7th Circuit said in part:
The right to marry includes the right to select one’s spouse. See Obergefell, 135 S. Ct. at 2599 (noting “that the right to personal choice regarding marriage is inherent in the concept of individual autonomy” and that there is dignity in individuals’ “autonomy to make such profound choices”). The proper inquiry, therefore, is whether Ms. Riker was prohibited from marrying the spouse of her choosing. Because Ms. Riker has not been left with any alternative means of exercising her right to marry Vest, it is clear that the burden on that right was not minimal. ...
The Department also submits that the prohibition of Ms. Riker’s marriage is necessary to serve as a deterrent to current employees. It submits that “[t]he policy communicates to IDOC employees that if they begin an inappropriate relationship with an offender while working at an IDOC facility, they will not only be held accountable but also will be prevented from seeing the inmate for as long as he or she is incarcerated.” The Department has not provided any evidence, however, to support its contention that prohibiting Ms. Riker’s marriage acts as a deterrent or that such deterrence is necessary.
National Law Journal reports on the decision.

Court Decrees Final Injunction Terms For Monitoring Florida Prison Kosher Meal Policy

As previously reported, in April the U.S. Department of Justice won its long-running lawsuit against the state of Florida over its prisons' kosher meal policy.  Last week in United States of America v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, (SD FL, Aug. 12, 2015), the court settled on the final language for the injunction it issued by separate order.  The parties agreed on the language on accountability and monitoring, but disagreed on the extent the Justice Department would have access to inspect prisons for compliance.  The court largely accepted the Justice Department's proposed language, and gave the federal government access to personnel, prisoners and food facilities so it can monitor compliance. NorthEscambia.com reports on the court's order.

8th Circuit: Preacher's Free Speech Rights Not Infringed By State Fair Rules On Where He Can Stand

In Powell v. Noble, (8th Cir., Aug. 14, 2015), the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the federal district court that a Christian preacher's free expression rights were not infringed when he was barred from delivering his religious message just outside the paid admission area at the Iowa State Fair. The court said in part:
The fair’s rule prohibiting impeding the flow of people in and out of the fairgrounds addresses the need to limit congestion and disruption and to facilitate safe and efficient access to the fair.... Powell retains alternative channels of communication on the fairgrounds.... While these alternatives may not be Powell’s first choice, “‘[t]he First Amendment does not demand unrestricted access to a nonpublic forum merely because use of that forum may be the most efficient means of delivering the speaker’s message.’” .... We also conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in holding Powell is unlikely to succeed in showing the rule against bringing signs attached to poles and sticks to the fair is unreasonable....The state has a valid interest in protecting the safety of fairgoers... Neither are we persuaded by Powell’s argument that the rule is arbitrary because the fair allows mounted poles to support tents and flags and small sticks for the fair’s many food-on-a-stick offerings.
The court however remanded the case to the district court for it to consider whether the State Fair's unwritten rules on access to the fairgrounds are overly vague in violation of the due process clause.  The Des Moines Register reports on the decision.

Tuesday, August 18, 2015

Comedian Takes On Televangelists Preaching Prosperity Gospel

Comedian John Oliver, host of the HBO late-night show "Last Week Tonight," has gained widespread attention for his Aug. 16 episode (YouTube video of episode) that took on televangelists who preach the Prosperity Gospel.  As reported by the Wall Street Journal, to illustrate the ease of creating a religious organization that can solicit tax-exempt contributions, Oliver filed paperwork to create his own church, Our Lady of Perpetual Exemption. The humorous 20-minute episode argues that some broadcast ministries exploit those who can least afford to donate.

Kentucky Clerk, Continuing Fight Against Issuing Marriage Licenses To Same-Sex Couples, Gets Short Reprieve

Rowan County, Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis is continuing her battle to obtain a religious exemption from the requirement that her office issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.  As previously reported, last week a federal district court issued a preliminary injunction requiring her to end her resistance, at least as to the two same-sex couples suing her.  Davis' office has been refusing to issue marriage licences to anyone.  Yesterday in Miller v. Davis, (ED KY, Aug. 17, 2015), the district court refused to stay its injunction while an appeal to the 6th Circuit plays out.  The court found that Davis is not likely to succeed on the merits in the appeal nor is she likely to suffer irreparable harm without a stay. However the court did grant a shorter stay. The court said "realizing that emotions are running high on both sides of the debate," it would grant a stay while Davis appeals the denial of a longer stay during the appeal.

The Lexington Herald-Leader reports on these developments and reactions to them:
"Here in Morehead, we have a fairness ordinance (protecting the civil rights of gays and lesbians) that our city council passed unanimously in 2013," said Mary Hargis, a retired state worker holding a sign that read "Obey the law."
"So to have a county official on her own turn around and negate all that progress by making us look like backward, inbred hillbillies, she's just reinforcing all the stereotypes people had about us...
[Thanks to Tom Rutledge for the lead.]

UPDATE: On Aug. 19, the district court, saying the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure require it to set an expiration date, issued an order (full text) providing that the stay it issued two days earlier will expire on Aug. 31 unless the 6th Circuit orders something else.

Monday, August 17, 2015

Today Is 100th Anniversary of Anti-Semitic Leo Frank Lynching

The Forward reminds us that today is the 100th anniversary of the anti-Semitic lynching of Leo Frank:
Frank was the superintendent of the National Pencil Factory in Atlanta in 1913 when Mary Phagan, a 13-year-old white employee, was murdered. Frank, 29, was an interloper in Georgia: a northerner and a Jew. The police quickly seized on him as a suspect. His trial, conducted in an atmosphere of rampant anti-Semitism and anti-Northern sentiment, led to his conviction and sentencing to death in the summer of 1913....
During his confinement, Frank’s advocates cast enough doubt on his conviction that Georgia’s governor commuted his sentence to life in prison, in June 1915.
It was a wildly unpopular decision in Georgia and not enough to save Frank’s life. He was moved to a rural prison 100 miles away in Milledgeville where, within a matter of weeks, an inmate slit Frank’s throat.
Frank survived the attack. But on the night of August 16, a lynch mob. organized by the leaders of Cobb County where Phagan’s family lived, stormed the prison. They bundled Frank into a car and drove him 150 miles to their county seat of Marietta, where they lynched him at dawn.
For anyone interested in an excellent and exhaustive history of the case, I recommend Steve Oney, And the Dead Shall Rise, (Vintage Books, 2003).

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

Sunday, August 16, 2015

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Ahmorae v. Davidson County Sheriff's Office, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105329 (MD TN, Aug. 11, 2015), a Tennessee federal district court dismissed a Muslim inmate's complaint that on one occasion during Ramadan he was not served dinner.

In Sousa v. Wegman, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105420 (ED CA, Aug. 11, 2015), a California federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85208, June 29, 2015) and allowed an inmate to move ahead with his complaint that  he was repeatedly denied attendance at religious services, holiday celebrations, use of the sweat lodge, and formal recognition for his Mexican Indian faith. UPDATE: The court issued a corrected order on Aug. 13 (2015 U.S. Dist. Lexis 107582).

In Pelayo v. Hernandez, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105521 (ED CA, Aug. 11, 2015), a California federal district court dismissed a Christian inmate's complaint that he was not allowed to bring his pocket Bible with him into the dining hall.

In Jaquez v. Birch, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105818 (ND OK, Aug. 12, 2015), an Oklahoma federal district court dismissed an inmate's complaint that he had not been able to see or talk with the jail chaplain.

In Frazier v. Cooper, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106707 (WD PA, Aug. 13, 2015), a Pennsylvania federal magistrate judge dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies a complaint by an inmate who is a member of the Moorish Science Temple of America that his religious practice was being limited.

In Saif'Ullah v. Cruzen, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107490 and in Mohammad-Bey v. Cruzen, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107510 (ND CA, Aug. 13, 2015), a California federal district court permitted inmates to move ahead with their complaint that correctional officers would not allow Muslim inmates to pray in groups larger than four, despite a contrary ruling by the Religious Review Committee.

Investigative Team Appointed To Study East Ramapo NY Schools

According to the New York Times, last Thursday the New York State Education Department appointed a team of three experts led by former New York City School Chancellor Dennis Walcott to study the operations of the struggling East Ramapo school system and offer recommendations. The Times reports:
Last fall, a former federal prosecutor appointed by the state to investigate the district found that the school board, which is dominated by Orthodox Jews, had diverted money from public schools to children who attend local yeshivas, leaving the district in dire financial trouble. The former prosecutor, Henry M. Greenberg, recommended that the state appoint a fiscal monitor with the power to override decisions by the school board. The State Assembly passed a bill in June that would have created such a position, but amid complaints from the East Ramapo school board that it would usurp local control of schools, the bill died in the State Senate.
Mr. Walcott and his team will not have the power to override decisions by the school board. But the state education commissioner, MaryEllen Elia, said in an interview that the department had been in discussions with the school board, and that she hoped the board would be amenable to the experts’ recommendations.
(See prior related posting.)

Saturday, August 15, 2015

DC Circuit: Allocation of Royalties To Religious Broadcasters Was Arbitrary and Capricious

Settling Devotional Claimants v. Copyright Royalty Board, (DC Cir., Aug. 14, 2015), is a suit involving a dispute among television ministries on how to divide among themselves the royalties paid by cable operators for re-transmission of the ministries’ television broadcasts for the years 2000-2003.  Under federal law, cable operators can retransmit programs initially aired on a broadcast station without further permission, but must deposit a royalty amount set by statute.  Each year the Copyright Royalty Judges determine how the royalties should be distributed. In an earlier phase of the proceedings the Judges determined the the total amount that should be allocated to devotional-religious programs. This phase of the proceedings involved the distribution of that amount among two competing groups-- a group of 23 ministries whose copyright broadcasts were distributed (the Settling Devotional Claimants) and a second group (Independent Producers Group) that claimed to represent 7 other ministries, but was held by the Royalty Judges to properly represent only four others. The Royalty Judges rejected the methodologies urged by both parties and instead used its own approach to allocate the royalties between the two groups.  The Court of Appeals held that the Royalty Judges' allocations were arbitrary and capricious, saying in part:
[The Devotional Claimants]  argue that, after the Royalty Judges ... simply split the difference between the two parties, and that decision was arbitrary and capricious and unsupported by substantial evidence. We agree with the Devotional Claimants..... King Solomon was not subject to the Administrative Procedure Act; the Royalty Judges are. 

Friday, August 14, 2015

DC Circuit Rejects Establishment Clause Challenge To ACA Religious Conscience Exemption

In Cutler v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, DC Cir., Aug. 14, 2015), the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit rejected an Establishment Clause challenge to the religious conscience exemption in the Affordable Care Act.  The ACA exempts from the individual mandate members of traditional religious groups such as the Amish and Mennonites who are conscientiously opposed to acceptance of health benefits and whose sect makes provision for their dependent members. Plaintiff Jeffrey Cutler objected for personal, not religious, reasons to purchasing insurance that complies with ACA requirements. The court said in part:
The religious exemption in the Affordable Care Act, like its counterpart in the Social Security Act, accommodates religion by exempting all believers whose faith system provides an established, alternative support network that ensures individuals will not later seek to avail themselves of the federal benefits for which they did not contribute. Cutler is correct that the Affordable Care Act withholds a similar exemption for non-believers. But the Supreme Court has repeatedly held that “the government may accommodate religious practices without violating the Establishment Clause....

Suit Says Florida Will Not Issue Correct Birth Certificates To Married Lesbian Couples

A lawsuit was filed in federal district court in Florida yesterday challenging the birth certificate policy of Florida's Bureau of Vital Statistics.  The complaint (full text) in Chin v. Armstrong, (ND FL, Aug. 13, 2015), alleges:
When a child is born to a woman who is married to another woman ... the Bureau ... will not issue accurate birth certificates listing both parents.... Instead, the Bureau will issue only a certificate that falsely indicates that the child has only one parent and that omits the mother’s spouse as the child’s second parent.
The suit contends that this infringes plaintiffs' fundamental right to marry as well as denying them equal protection of the laws. Equality Florida Action issued a press release on the filing of the lawsuit.

Kentucky Clerk Continues To Refuse To Issue Marriage Licenses, Despite Injunction

Continuing to maintain her religious objections to issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, Rowan County, Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis yesterday filed with the federal district court a motion (full text) to stay the court's Aug. 12 preliminary injunction pending appeal. (See prior posting.) Meanwhile, as reported by AP, Davis' office continued to refuse to issue marriage licenses. Staff said Davis was on vacation, and others in the office also authorized to issue licenses refused to do so.  The staff handed one couple a Post-it note with the phone number of Davis' lawyers, Liberty Counsel. Attorneys for plaintiffs in the case are considering asking the court to hold Davis in contempt.

Court Upholds Order Against Bakery that Refused Wedding Cake For Same-Sex Couple

In Craig v. Masterpiece Cakeshop, Inc., (CO App., Aug. 13, 2015). a Colorado appellate court, in a 64-page opinion, affirmed the decision of the Colorado Civil Rights Commission (see prior posting) that a bakery's refusal to create a wedding cake for a same-sex couple violates Colorado's public accommodation law, and that the Commission's cease and desist order does not infringe the bakery owner's free exercise or free speech rights. The court rejected the bakery's claim that its refusal to create the cake was "because of" its opposition to same-sex marriage, not because of its opposition to plaintiffs' sexual orientation. It held that because same-sex marriage is entered into only (or predominately) by gays, lesbians and bisexuals, the conduct cannot be divorced from status.

The court rejected defendants' argument that requiring them to create the wedding cake would amount to unconstitutionally compelled speech:
such conduct, even if compelled by the government, is not sufficiently expressive to warrant First Amendment protections.
Finally the court concluded that the cease and desist order did not violate the Christian owner's free exercise rights under the state and federal constitutions because the Colorado Law Against Discrimination is a neutral law of general applicability. Colorado Springs Gazette reports on the decision.

Thursday, August 13, 2015

In Israel, Knesset Committee Rejects Agriculture Ministry Rules On Kapparot Ritual

Jerusalem Post reports today that in Israel, the  Knesset's Economic Affairs Committee has rejected rules issued by the Agriculture Ministry to strictly regulate the controversial pre-Yom Kippur ceremony of kapparot.  The ceremony involves the slaughter of a chicken after it is first lifted oven one's head as a way of symbolically shedding one's sins.  The Agriculture Ministry rules required strict limits and inspections to insure that the birds do not suffer.  However the Knesset Committee's chairman said the rules were overly stringent and would have effectively prevented the practice.  During committee hearings on the rules yesterday, a Knesset member from the United Torah Judaism Party threatened that his party would topple the coalition government if the regulations were upheld.

Guam Legislature Passes Marriage Equality and LGBT Employment Discrimination Laws

Pacific Daily News reports that the Guam legislature yesterday passed the Guam Marriage Equality Act (full text), aligning the U.S. Territory's laws with the a district court's decision in June specifically striking down Guam's same-sex marriage ban. (See prior posting.)

The legislature this week also passed the Guam Employment Nondiscrimination Act of 2015 (full text), adding bans on employment discrimination based on gender identity or expression; sexual orientation; and veteran or military status. The law includes an exemption for religious and educational institutions that are exempt from the religious discrimination provisions of Title VII of the 1964 federal Civil Rights Act. HRC Blog has more on the new law.

Court Says Kentucky Clerk Cannot Refuse To Issue Marriage Licences

In Miller v. Davis, (ED KY, Aug. 12, 2015), a Kentucky federal district court granted a preliminary injunction barring Rowan County, Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis from continuing her policy of refusing to issue all marriage licenses because of her religious objections to issuing licences to same-sex couples.  The injunction enjoins Davis from applying the policy to future marriage license requests submitted by plaintiffs in the case.

Rejecting free exercise, free speech, religious test and Kentucky Religious Freedom Act arguments, the court held:
Davis remains free to practice her Apostolic Christian beliefs. She may continue to attend church twice a week, participate in Bible Study and minister to female inmates at the Rowan County Jail. She is even free to believe that marriage is a union between one man and one woman, as many Americans do. However, her religious convictions cannot excuse her from performing the duties that she took an oath to perform as Rowan County Clerk.
The Kentucky ACLU issued a press release announcing the decision.  AP reports on the decisionl  Davis immediately filed a Notice of Appeal (full text). [Thanks to Tom Rutledge for the lead.]

Wednesday, August 12, 2015

Kansas Federal District Court Implements Obergefell Holding

Even though the U.S. Supreme Court decided in the Obergefell case that same-sex marriages must be recognized, lower courts still need to tie up loose to make the ruling effective nationwide.  In Marie v. Mosier, (D. KA, Aug. 10, 2015), a Kansas federal district court issued a declaratory judgment that Kansas’ same-sex marriage laws (and related policies) violate the Constitution and thus are void. However in light of claims by Kansas officials that the state is voluntarily complying with the Obergefell holding, the court delayed issuing a permanent injunction to determine whether the issue is moot, saying:
In the Court’s view, the prudent course of action is to let defendants finish updating their policies and practices to conform to Obergefell’s new rule of constitutional law. The Court thus defers, for now, the portion of plaintiffs’ summary judgment motion seeking injunctive relief. Should subsequent events reveal that the Court’s hopefulness about Kansas officials’ pledge to comply with Obergefell is misplaced, plaintiffs may supplement their motion for summary judgment on their claims for injunctive relief...
SCOTUSblog discusses the opinion.

Canadian Court Says Aboriginal Religious Freedom Not Infringed By Approval of Ski Resort

In Ktunaxa Nation Council v. Minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations, (BC Ct. App., Aug. 6, 2015), the Court of Appeal for the Canadian province of British Columbia held that the provincial government did not infringe the religious freedom of the aboriginal Ktunaxa Nation when it granted Glacier Resorts, Ltd. the right to build a year-round ski resort in the Jumbo Valley region of southeastern British Columbia’s Purcell Mountains. A number of accommodations in the plans were made to accommodate the Ktunaxa. However, according to the Ktunaxa:
the proposed resort lies at the heart of a sacred area of paramount spiritual importance within their claimed traditional territory, as it is the Grizzly Bear Spirit’s home. They claimed that if the development of the resort was permitted, the Spirit would leave, and they would no longer be able to receive physical or spiritual assistance and guidance from the Spirit, which would have a profound negative impact on their identity and culture.
The court held that Sec. 2(a) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that protects freedom of conscience and religion
does not apply to protect the vitality of religious communities where the vitality of the community is predicated on the assertion by a religious group that, to preserve the communal dimension of its religious beliefs, others are required to act or refrain from acting and behave in a manner consistent with a belief that they do not share.
The Townsman reports on the decision.

Challenge To A.A. Requirerment In Probationary Massage License Survives Motion To Dismiss

In Sundquist v. State of Nebraska, (D NE, Aug. 10, 2015), plaintiff Marvin Sundquist who held a probationary license to practice massage therapy in Nebraska challenged the constitutionality of a requirement that he attend Alcoholics Anonymous meetings in order to keep his probationary license.  He claimed religious objections to AA which has substantial religious components in it.  His licensing probation compliance monitor refused his proposed secular alternative.  A Nebraska federal district court held:
In sum, the Court finds that Sundquist has alleged a plausible claim under the Establishment Clause, and that defendants Vierk and Schuldt are not entitled to qualified immunity. It remains to be seen, of course, whether Sundquist can actually prove his claim and prove that he suffered actual damages—but he should have the opportunity to do so.