Supreme Court Denies Review In Two Religious Rights Cases

The U.S. Supreme Court today denied certiorari in Wayne County v. Bible Believers, (Docket No. 15-1090, cert. denied 5/16/2016) (Order List).  In the case, the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, sitting en banc, upheld the right of Bible Believers, a Christian group, to engage in provocative and offensive proselytizing of Muslims at the annual Dearborn, Michigan Arab International Festival. (See prior posting.)

The Supreme Court also denied certiorari in Rogers v. Roman Catholic Archbishop, (Docket No. 15-1105, cert. denied 5/16/2016) (Order List).  In the case, the Appeals Court of Massachusetts upheld an injunction against former parishioners of Frances X. Cabrini Church in Scituate who have held a 24-hour vigil in the church for over ten years in order to protest plans to close it. (See prior posting.)

Obama Appoints 2 USCIRF Commissioners

In a press release issued Friday, the U,S. Commission on International Religious Freedom announced appointments by President Obama to the Commission,  On May 12 the President announced his intention to reappoint Rev. Thomas J. Reese, S.J.and to appoint Dr. John Ruskay to two year terms.  Reese is a senior analyst for the National Catholic Reporter.  Ruskay is Executive Vice President-Emeritus of the United Jewish Appeal (UJA) Federation of Jewish Philanthropies of New York. Ruskay replaces Eric Schwartz whose term is expiring,

Man Pleads Guilty To Forcibly Removing Airline Passenger's Hijab

According to a Justice Department press release, on Friday a 37-year old North Carolina man pleaded guilty to one count of using force or the threat of force to intentionally obstruct a Muslim woman's free exercise of religion. In the plea agreement (full text) filed in New Mexico federal district court, defendant Gil Parker Payne admits that last December while on a Southwest Airlines flight from Chicago to Albuquerque he forcibly pulled the hijab off the head of a Muslim woman on the flight, telling her "Take it off! This is America!"  In the plea agreement, the government recommends a sentence of probation, with two months home detention, plus any fine or restitution set by the court.

Head of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, Vanita Gupta, mentioned this case among others in reviewing the government's recent hate crime prosecutions.  Her remarks came in a speech (full text) at the Muslim Advocates annual gala at which she accepted the Justice Thurgood Marshall Award.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Shivaraj S. Huchhanavar, Introduction to Traditional and Modern Natural Law Theories, (May 5, 2016).
• Brett G. Scharffs, Religious Majorities and Restrictions on Religion, (Notre Dame Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Farrah Ahmed, Remedying Personal Law Systems, (International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, Forthcoming).
• Brian Leiter, Why Tolerate Religion, Again? A Reply to Michael Mcconnell, (May 8, 2016).
• Kathleen A. McKee, Book Review: An Alternative to Business as Usual: Evangelical Christian Executives: A New Model for Business Corporations, (December 11, 2016).
• Engy Abdelkader, When Islamophobia Turns Violent: The 2016 U.S. Presidential Elections, (The Bridge Initiative, Georgetown University, 2016).
• Nasiru Wada Khalil, Perception and Reaction: The Representation of the Shari’a in Nollywood and Kanywood Films, (May 4, 2016).

From SmartCILP:

• Stephen R. Munzer, Secularization, Anti-Minority Sentiment, and Cultural Norms in the German Circumcision Controversy, 37 University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law 503-581 (2015).
• Symposium: Religion and the Law. Articles by Marc O. DeGirolami, Kevin C. Walsh, Benjamin Justice, Joshua A. Decker and Jonathan E. Amgott. 26 Stanford Law & Policy Review 385-553 (2015).

Paper Reviews Recent Use of Egypt's Blasphemy Law

Ahram Online today carries an interesting article on the use of Egypt's blasphemy law in recent months. Prosecutors have just begun to investigate a complaint against the satirical performance art troupe Atfal El-Shawaree (Street Children) over a video that they posted online mimicking the hosts on the state-owned religious radio station Al-Quran Al-Karim (The Holy Quran). At least one member of Parliament is proposing repeal of Article 98(f) of the criminal code that prohibits promoting "contempt of any divine religion or its adherents."

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Harvey v. Segura, (10th Cir., May 10, 2016), the 10th Circuit affirmed the dismissal of an inmate's complaint that authorities confiscated his  kufi.

In Vazquez v. Maccone, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60372 (ED NY, May 6, 2016), a New York federal district court held that plaintiff's inability to kneel on the floor to silently pray while temporarily held in the squad room for arrest processing did impose a substantial burden on his religious exercise.

In Jones v. Arizona Department of Corrections, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60454 (D Z, May 5, 2016), an Arizona federal district court permitted a Muslim inmate to proceed with his complaint that he was not permitted to grow his beard longer than one-quarter inch, and that the feeding time for Ramadan began too late.

In Phillips v. Cobb, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60716 (WD LA, May 6, 2016), a Louisiana federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60717, April 4, 2016) and dismissed a complaint by a Muslim inmate that he was not allowed to attend congregational jumu'ah services, receive a prayer rug or kufi or receive adequate meals during Ramadan.

In Desmond v. Phelps, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61406 (D DE, May 9, 2016), a Delaware federal district court refused to dismiss, but ordered an amended complaint with a more definite statement of plaintiffs' claims that authorities refused to allow Catholic inmates to worship, assemble, and celebrate on all religious holidays, and engaged in other sorts of retaliation.

In Jones v. Western Tidewater Regional Jail, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61425 (ED VA, May 6, 2016), a Virginia federal district court dismissed a complaint by a Rastafarian inmate that the food service provider and kitchen supervisor refused to serve him his religiously required vegan diet.

In Tillman v. Allen, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62260 (ED VA, May 9, 2016), a Virginia federal district court dismissed on various grounds a complaint by a Wiccan inmate that he could not attend Wiccan services, possess Wiccan objects or partake in the Common Fare diet.

EU Criticizes New State Laws In U.S. Which Restrict LGBT Rights

On Thursday the European External Action Service (the European Union's diplomatic service) issued a statement (full text) criticizing laws recently enacted in several U.S. states dealing with religious objections to same-sex relationships and with transgender restroom concerns.  The EU's statement reads in part:

The recently adopted laws including in the states of Mississippi, North Carolina and Tennessee, which discriminate against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons in the United States contravene the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which the US is a State party, and which states that the law shall prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection.

As a consequence, cultural, traditional or religious values cannot be invoked to justify any form of discrimination, including discrimination against LGBTI persons. These laws should be reconsidered as soon as possible.

Federal Government Issues Guidance Under Title IX On Rights of Transgender Students

The U.S. Justice Department and the Department of Education today released a letter (full text) providing Joint Guidance to schools and colleges on ensuring the civil rights of transgender students.  The Joint Guidance applies to schools covered by Title IX, i.e. schools that receive federal financial assistance. The Joint Guidance notes, however, that:

An educational institution that is controlled by a religious organization is exempt from Title IX to the extent that compliance would not be consistent with the religious tenets of such organization. 20 U.S.C. § 1681(a)(3); 34 C.F.R. § 106.12(a).

The letter states in part:

The Departments interpret Title IX to require that when a student or the student’s parent or guardian, as appropriate, notifies the school administration that the student will assert a gender identity that differs from previous representations or records, the school will begin treating the student consistent with the student’s gender identity. Under Title IX, there is no medical diagnosis or treatment requirement that students must meet as a prerequisite to being treated consistent with their gender identity....

A school’s Title IX obligation to ensure nondiscrimination on the basis of sex requires schools to provide transgender students equal access to educational programs and activities even in circumstances in which other students, parents, or community members raise objections or concerns. As is consistently recognized in civil rights cases, the desire to accommodate others’ discomfort cannot justify a policy that singles out and disadvantages a particular class of students....

Title IX’s implementing regulations permit a school to provide sex-segregated restrooms, locker rooms, shower facilities, housing, and athletic teams, as well as single-sex classes under certain circumstances. When a school provides sex-segregated activities and facilities, transgender students must be allowed to participate in such activities and access such facilities consistent with their gender identity.

Saudis, Iran At Odds Over Hajj Arrangements This Year

AlJazeera reported yesterday that Iranian Muslims may miss out on the Hajj this September because Iran and Saudi Arabia have been unable to agree on organizational details.  The two countries are at odds over transportation, security and procedures for issuing of visas this year. Last year 464 Iranians were among the 2000 pilgrims killed in a stampede during the Hajj.  Iran insists that the Saudis issue visas inside Iran through the Swiss embassy (the two countries have severed relations), while the Saudis say Iranians should use an online system. Also Iran wants to split pilgrims between Saudi and Iranian airlines.

Wedding Artists Challenge City's Public Accommodation Anti-Discrimination Ordinance

Two owners of an upscale hand painting and calligraphy business filed suit in an Arizona state court yesterday challenging the provision in the Phoenix city code, adopted in 2013, that bars public accommodations from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. The 88-page pre-enforcement complaint (full text) in Brush & Nib Studio, LC v. City of Phoenix, (AZ Super. Ct., filed 5/12/2016), contends that plaintiffs' free speech, free exercise and equal protection rights are infringed by requiring them to produce wedding invitations and similar wedding art for same-sex marriages. It also asserts that the statutory provision barring advertisements or notices that suggest discriminatory practices prevents plaintiffs from explaining their religious and artistic reasons for refusing to create custom art for same-sex weddings. An ADF press release announced the filing of the lawsuit.

Student's Complaint Over Expulsion From Catholic High School Dismissed Under Ecclesiastical Abstention Doctrine

In In re St. Thomas High School, (TX App., May 1, 2016), a Texas state appellate court held that the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine requires dismissal of a breach of contract lawsuit against a Catholic high school brought by a 16-year old student who was expelled and by his parents. The expulsion came after the parents sent the school a letter about the handling of a grade dispute.  The letter complained that the teacher involved had not called the parents as they had requested.  It alleged that when the teacher told the student the reason for failing to call-- he was too busy preparing for a romantic night with his wife to celebrate their wedding anniversary-- that this amounted to engaging in a discussion with the student "in a sexually harassing fashion."

The school concluded that the false accusations of sexual harassment against the teacher, made it impossible for other teachers to teach the student without fear of similar charges. The court said in part:

we conclude that St. Thomas’s status as a Catholic high school does not place it outside the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine’s reach. No less than a Catholic church, St. Thomas is a religious institution enjoying First Amendment protection for the free exercise of religion....

This record belies any contention that spiritual standards and religious doctrine play no role in the parties’ dispute. Plaintiffs expressly relied on the Catholic nature of a St. Thomas education to justify their demands....  In addition ... this record also demonstrates impermissible interference with St. Thomas’s management of its internal affairs and encroachment upon its internal governance.

Sandra Jolley Appointed To US Commission on International Religious Freedom

In a press release last week, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom announced that on April 27, Sandra Jolley was appointed to serve a two-year term on the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom.  Her appointment was made by Sen. Harry Reid, minority leader in the U.S. Senate.  Three commissioners are appointed by the President and six other are appointed by party leaders in the House and Senate. Jolley has been a leader in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Nevada.  She replaces Dr. Katrina Lantos Swett who served two terms on the Commission.

Florida Appeals Court Hears Oral Arguments In Scholarship Tax Credit Challenge

A Florida state appeals court on Tuesday heard oral arguments (video of full oral arguments) in McCall v. Scott, a constitutional challenge to the state's Tax Credit Scholarship Program.  A trial court dismissed the case, finding that plaintiffs lacked standing. (See prior posting.) Daily Business Review reports on the oral arguments.

Judge Orders Church To Hold New Election

In Rock Church, Inc. v Venigalla, (Sup. Ct. NY Cnty, May 3, 2016), a New York state trial court ordered conflicting factions in a small upper East Side nondenominational Christian church to hold a new special meeting of the Church's membership to vote for a Board of Trustees.  The court found that a previous election was invalidly held.  The court concluded that a second ballot after most members thought a membership meeting had ended resulted in a sham election without adequate notice to the membership, in violation of the Church's By-Laws. At issue is a dispute over whether the faction that supports the church's pastor, Daniel Iampaglia, or the faction seeking his dismissal will be elected.  At one point, one of the opponents of Pastor Iampglia filed a police complaint charging him with petit larceny for taking funds from the church offeratory collections.  Iampaglia says the funds were used for church expenses as was the custom. New York Daily News reports on the decision.

4th Circuit Hears Oral Arguments In Graduation Prayer and Venue Case

On Tuesday, the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in American Humanist Association v. Greenville County School District. (Audio of full oral arguments.) At issue was the graduation ceremony prayer policy of the Greenville County, South Carolina school district, as well as its practice of holding some graduation ceremonies at a religious chapel on a local college campus. (See prior posting.) Greenville News reports on the oral arguments.

Ecclesiastical Abstention Requires Dismissal of Suit Over Sikh Temple Membership

In Singh v. Sandhar, (TX App., May 10, 2016), a Texas appellate court, on the basis of the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine, dismissed a suit contesting the membership list that was used by a Sikh temple in determining who was eligible to vote in an election to select members of the temple's 7-member executive committee known as the Prabandhak Committee. The court held:

The temple’s alleged failure to follow its bylaws on a matter of internal governance involves ecclesiastical concerns, and civil courts may not interfere in these matters when disposition of church property is not at stake. 

The Citadel Refuses Religious Accommodation In Uniform Requirement

Washington Post reported yesterday on a controversial decision by The Citadel to refuse a religious accommodation to its strict student uniform requirement.  The South Carolina public military college will not allow a Muslim student who has been admitted to wear her hijab. According to the paper:

[T]he fact that [the school] was considering an exception ... set off shock waves among alumni. The idea pleased some in the close-knit corps, who felt it could be an important symbol of religious freedom and inclusiveness. But it upset others who felt it would clash with the mission and ideals of the Citadel, where loyalty, teamwork and uniformity are paramount.

At the Citadel, students are expected to leave behind their individuality ... and form opinions based on character rather than appearance. Allowing one student to wear something completely different struck many as antithetical to that mission. And some objected, as well, because exceptions have apparently not ever been made for other religions. Christian cadets have been told not to display crosses, for example.

That the exception was being considered at a time when the role of Islam in U.S. culture is so polarizing ...  made the issue particularly incendiary far beyond the Charleston, S.C., campus.

Suit Challenges Maryland County Ten Commandments Monument

In March, a lawsuit was filed in federal district court in Maryland challenging a Ten Commandments monument located on the courthouse lawn in Cumberland, Maryland.  The complaint (full text) in Davis v. Allegany County Commissioners, (D MD, filed 3/8/2016), recounts plaintiff's efforts since 2004 to have the monument removed.  Apparently defendants were not actually served in the case until sometime between April 29 and May 6.  The Cumberland Times-News last week reported on the reaction of county officials to the lawsuit. They complain that plaintiff is not even a resident of the county and are obtaining free legal assistance in defending against the suit. One county commissioner added:

These items were manufactured and put out by (filmmaker) Cecil B. DeMille.  They sent these things out as promotional items for the [Ten Commandments] movie. It was never in a church. It is an historic monument in an historic area.

[Thanks to Bob Ritter for the lead.]

Minister Can Sue His Church For Disability Benefits

In Bigelow v. Sassafras Grove Baptist Church, (NC App., May 10, 2016), the North Carolina Court of Appeals held that neither the ministerial exception doctrine nor the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine bars a minister from suing his church for contractually promised disability compensation and benefits.  The court said in part:

because plaintiff’s complaint does not challenge the Church’s decision to terminate his employment, but instead seeks to enforce a contractual obligation regarding his compensation and benefits, we hold that the ministerial exception does not apply and is not a basis for dismissal of plaintiff’s claims....

because a court can decide plaintiff’s contract-based claims applying “neutral principles of law,” without entangling the Court in an ecclesiastical dispute or interpretation, we hold that the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine does not require dismissal of plaintiff’s complaint.

[Thanks to Will Esser via Religionlaw for the lead.] 

Italian Court Overturns Convictions For Eid al-Adha Sacrifice

An Italian appeals court last week overturned the animal cruelty conviction of two Romanian travelers who had been fined by a lower court for the public slaughter of a young goat to mark the Muslim festival Eid  al-Adah (the Feast of the Sacrifice). The Local yesterday reported on the decision by the appellate court in Genoa:

In overturning the conviction, judge Mauro Amisano wrote that animal cruelty charges “presume the lack of any valid motive which renders the cruelty abject and futile.”

Amisano added that the sacrifice had a valid motive as it was part of a religious festival and had been carried out according to longstanding tradition.

“As part of a religious practice, one can assume the men did not expose the animal to any additional suffering,” he added.

“It cannot be considered illegal because it is a practice which is permitted by the freedom of religious expression.”