Settlements Revealed In Abuse Cases Against Jewish School

A suit filed last week in state court in New York reveals information about the previously secret settlements by an Orthodox Jewish school in two cases of sexual abuse dating back to the 1970's. The Gothamist and the New York Post report that the settlements totaling $2.1 million were reached in 2014 with two plaintiffs who were abused as young boys by Rabbi Joel "Yehuda" Kolko who was kept on for 25 years as a teacher at Yeshiva Torah Temimah in Brooklyn. The settlements came to light when the victims now filed suit for $1 million of the promised settlements that have not been paid. It has been alleged that Rabbi Kolko had abused numerous other students, though an internal investigation by the school rejected the claims. In 2012 in a plea agreement, Kolko pleaded guilty to two misdemeanor counts of child endangerment.

Northern Ireland Appeals Court Upholds Anti-Gay Discrimination Finding Against Bakery

In a widely watched case, the Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland yesterday upheld the finding of a trial judge that a bakery had illegally discriminated on the basis of sexual orientation in the  provision of goods and services to the public when it refused an order for a cake for a private event marking the end of 'Northern Ireland Anti-homophobic Week' and the political momentum towards same-sex marriage legislation.  The cake was to feature a picture of 'Bert and Ernie' (the logo for QueerSpace) with the caption, "Support Gay Marriage."  In Lee v. McArthur, (NI CA, Oct. 24, 2016), the 3-judge panel rejected the religious freedom and compelled speech defenses advanced by Ashers Bakery.  The court rejected the notion that the cake forced the bakery to express approval for same-sex marriage, saying in part:

The fact that a baker provides a cake for a particular team or portrays witches on a Halloween cake does not indicate any support for either.

The court rejected broadly defendants' religious discrimination arguments, saying:

Anyone who applies a religious aspect or a political aspect to the provision of services may be caught by equality legislation, not because the legislation treats their religious belief or political opinion less favourably but because that person seeks to distinguish, on a basis that is prohibited, between those who will receive their service and those who will not....  In the present case the appellants might elect not to provide a service that involves any religious or political message. What they may not do is provide a service that only reflects their own political or religious belief in relation to sexual orientation.

The Guardian, reporting on the decision, says that the decision will be appealed to the UK's Supreme Court.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Susanna Mancini, Global Religion in a Post-Westphalia World, (Handbook on Global Constitutionalism (A. Lang & A. Wiener eds.), Elgar Publishing (2017 Forthcoming)).
• Steven Aiello, Islamic and Jewish Law Approaches to Killing, (October 15, 2016).
• Rangita de Silva de Alwis & Indira Jaising, The Role of Personal Laws in Creating A 'Second Sex', (New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, Vol. 48, Pg. 1085, 2016).
• Alan C. Weinstein, Regulation of Religious Uses Under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, (Local Government, Land Use, and the First Amendment, American Bar Association, 2017 Forthcoming).
• Effie Fokas, Banal, Benign or Pernicious? Religion and National Identity From the Perspective of Religious Minorities in Greece, (New Diversities, 2015, Vol. 17, No. 1, 47-62).
• Daphne Gilbert, Let Thy Conscience Be Thy Guide (But Not My Guide!): Physicians and the Duty to Refer, (McGill Journal of Law and Health 2016 10(2)).
• Neil Siegel, The Distinctive Role of Justice Samuel Alito: From a Politics of Restoration to a Politics of Dissent, (Yale Law Journal Forum, Vol. 126, p.164 (2016)).
• Fatmir Halili & Arif Riza, The Betrothal and Marriage - According to Islamic Law (Shariah) and Under the Secular System, (October 15, 2016).

From SmartCILP and elsewhere:

• Gregory M. Lipper, The Contraceptive-Coverage Cases and Politicized Free-Exercise Lawsuits, University of Illinois Law Review, Vol. 2016. pp. 1331- 1346.
• Yifat Bitton, Suspension, Hu(wo)man Rights and Torts: Discriminatory Religious Practices and Hu(wo)man Rights Suspension Tactics in Remedying Feminine Suffering Through Tort Law, 14 Seattle Journal for Social Justice 669-726 (2016).
• Charles Leben, Hebrew Sources in the Doctrine of the Law of Nature and Nations in Early Modern Europe, 27 European Journal of International Law 79-106 (2016).
• Marvin Lim, Human Dignity and Punishment in Judaic and Islamic Law: War and the Death Penalty, [Abstract], 22 Southwestern Journal of International Law 303-358 (2016).
• Shlomo C. Pill, Valuing Our Discordant Constitutional Discourse: Autonomous-Text Constitutionalism and the Jewish Legal Tradition, 64 Buffalo Law Review 349-411 (2016).

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Peele v. Klemm, (3d Cir., Oct. 17, 2016), the 3rd Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a Muslim inmate's complaint that a Department of Corrections policy restricts rights to attend Eid al-Adha and Eid al-Fitr feasts. Inmates were required to pay for the feast and had to participate in all of Ramadan.

In Wilkins v. Lemon, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143491 (ND IN, Oct. 17, 2016), an Indiana federal district court allowed a Muslim inmate to move ahead on claims for damages and injunctive relief for being denied halal meat, prayer oils and festive foods for the Eids.

In Biggins v. Coupe, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143696 (D DE, Oct. 14, 2016), a Delaware federal district court held that an inmate's in forma pauperis free exercise claim is barred by the 3-strike rule even though it was brought as a mandamus action.

In Abreu v. Travers, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145171 (ND NY, Oct. 20, 2016), a New York federal district court held because plaintiff failed to identify his religion, it could not determine if the denial of one kosher meal placed a substantial burden on his religious beliefs.

In Wallace v. Olivarria, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146380 (SD CA, Oct. 21, 2016), a California federal district court dismissed an inmate's complaint that his religious practice was burdened by changing his schedule for his prison job.

"Blessing" Scam Leads To Hate Crime Charges

Last week, the Kings County (Brooklyn), New York district attorney announced that a 44-year-old woman has been indicted on charges of grand larceny as a hate crime for taking $160,000 in cash and jewelry from two Chinese women in separate incidents involving the same type of scam. The victims were told that they or family members would die because of a curse that could only be removed by gathering large sums of cash and jewels to be blessed. The victims were told to place the cash and jewels in a bag for the blessing.  When the victims later opened the bag, they found the cash and jewels gone. According to NBC News, the hate crime charges were based on the theory that the victims were targeted because of their Chinese ethnicity and because of their religious spiritual beliefs.

Judgment For Return of Pastor's Salary Is Not Dischargeable in Bankruptcy

In In re Andrews, 2016 Bankr. LEXIS 3786 (SD MI Bankr., Oct 20, 2016), a Mississippi federal bankruptcy judge held that amounts the former pastor of a break-away church owed to the parent body of the denomination are not dischargeable in a Chapter 13 bankruptcy proceeding.  Robert Andrews was the long-time pastor of Cross Point Church, a church under the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the Mississippi Conference of the Methodist Protestant Church.  While pastors are paid by local congregations, they are appointed and removed by the parent Conference. Andrews and the Board  of Cross Point Church voted to break away from its parent Conference. The district president of the Conference in response removed Andrews as Cross Point's pastor. The Board of Cross Point nevertheless entered a one-year employment contract with Andrews, including a provision that if the Conference removed Andrews, the pastor would be entitled to his full year's salary.

When the Conference then voted to reject Cross Point's attempted withdrawal, Cross Point's treasurer gave Andrews a check for his remaining yearly salary of $69,505. Andrews and his backers on the Board also locked the church building, took the keys and church records with them and formed a new congregation. In a suit by the remaining members of Cross Point, a state court issued a preliminary injunction requiring Andrews and his backers to return the keys and records. In a subsequent jury trial, the state court awarded Cross Point a judgment of $69,505 against Andrews, finding that Andrews had converted funds belonging to the Church. When Cross Point attempted to garnish Andrew's checking account to recover the funds, Andrews filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy protection.

Cross Point claimed that the debt owed to it is not dischargeable.  The bankruptcy court agreed.  It first held that the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine precludes it from revisiting the question of Andrews' removal as pastor of Cross Point. It held that under Sec. 523(a)(4) of the Bankruptcy Code, the debt is not dischargeable because it involved "defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity" and "embezzlement."  The court said in part:

Andrews admitted at Trial that as pastor, officer, and Board member, he owed a fiduciary duty to Cross Point Church to safeguard its funds.

Lawsuit Claims Kars4Kids Is Using Shell Synagogue To Hide Financial Dealings

Last week, an Orthodox synagogue, Young Israel of Eltingville, filed suit in a New York state trial court against the charity Kars4Kids alleging that the charity is improperly attempting to take over the synagogue located on Staten Island and use it to avoid filings with the Internal Revenue Service. The Forward, PixII, The Gothamist and an earlier New York Post article all report on the lawsuit and its background. In 2007, a former president of the synagogue-- attempting to save it from financial collapse-- entered an arrangement with Oorah, Inc., an Orthodox Jewish charity affiliated with Kars4Kids.  Oorah's name was placed on the deed to the synagogue in exchange for $250,000 and upgrades to the building. Young Israel says that the arrangement was for it to continue to used the sanctuary for worship, while Oorah would use the rest of the building for a preschool and adult classes.  An earlier dispute over whether Young Israel owes Oorah for some of the renovations is in state court after a religious court awarded Oorah $1 million.

In 2008, Rabbi Eliyahu Mintz, president of Oorah and Kars4Kids, incorporated Congregation Oorah and listed its place of worship as the Young Israel synagogue, even though Congregation Oorah apparently conducts no religious services.  In last week's lawsuit, Young Israel alleges that all of this was undertaken to create an entity that is exempt from filing Form 990 with the Internal Revenue Service. This, it is alleged, would allow Kars4Kids, which has a history of questionable financial dealings, to use Congregation Oorah to hide its activities.

Vatican Close To Agreement With China On Appointment of Bishops

Reuters reports today that the Vatican and the government of China are close to reaching an agreement on ordination of bishops. This would end a 60-year dispute over the authority of the Vatican in which the Chinese Communist Party has appointed bishops who often are not recognized by Rome while an underground Catholic Church continues to be loyal to the Vatican.  The Vatican may be set to recognize 4 of the 8 disputed bishops appointed by China. Of the other 4, two have children or girlfriends, and two head dioceses where there is a competing Vatican-appointed bishop. Pope Francis has made the negotiations with China a priority.  The agreement under discussion would allow local clergy to choose bishops, with the Pope making the final appointment and having a veto over the choices.  A large number of vacancies currently exist in dioceses in China.  The Vatican hopes that an agreement will also lead China to recognize the 30 bishops who currently refuse to be part of the government's Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Defrauded Church's Conversion Claim Against Bank Is Dismissed

In Mt. Hope Universal Baptist Church, Inc. v. Bowen, (NY Kings Cty. Sup. Ct., Oct. 14, 2016), a New York state trial court dismissed a conversion claim brought by a church that was defrauded out of the proceeds of a life insurance policy.  In 1976, Rosetta Goodridge was the founding member of Mt. Hope Baptist Church.  She died in 2009, leaving a life insurance policy that named the church as beneficiary.  Goodridge's daughters and granddaughters fraudulently opened a bank account at Citibank in the name of Mt. Hope.  They then filed a claim with the insurance company and received the proceeds of the policy.  Among other claims, the church sued Citibank for conversion.  The court dismissed the action, holding that because Mt. Hope never had actual or constructive possession of the check, it had no cause of action for conversion. The court also held that the insurance company does not have a valid claim against Citibank for contribution.

Court Clarifies and Refuses To Narrow Injunction Against Federal Transgender Guidelines

As previously reported, in August a Texas federal district court issued a nationwide preliminary injunction preventing the federal government, particularly the Department of Education, from enforcing Guidelines issued earlier this year interpreting Title IX as barring discrimination by schools on the basis of gender identity. Now in State of Texas v. United States, (ND TX, Oct. 18, 2016), the court issued an opinion responding to a request for clarification and narrowing of the injunction.  The court refused to limit the injunction to the 13 states that are plaintiffs in the lawsuit, saying:

A nationwide injunction is necessary because the alleged violation extends nationwide.

The court also clarified that the injunction does not impact the EEOC's functions or activities other than preventing it from using the challenged Guidelines to argue that the definition of  "sex" as it relates to intimate facilities includes gender identity. The court ordered additional briefing by the parties on whether the Guidelines are enjoined in total or whether the principle of severability applies to them; whether the injunction impacts Title VII investigations when teachers or staff and students use the same bathrooms; and whether the injunction applies to activities of OSHA or the Department of Labor.  Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton issued a press release on the decision.

New Polling Results On Candidate Morality and Religion

PRRI yesterday released polling results on voters reactions to immoral conduct by political candidates and to the importance of candidates' religious beliefs. It reports:

Across the political spectrum, Americans today are less likely to believe personal transgressions prevent public officials from performing their duties well. Seven in ten (70%) Republicans and more than six in ten Democrats (61%) and independents (63%) say public officials can behave ethically in their professional roles even if they acted immorally in their personal life. Notably, in 2011 only 36% of Republicans agreed, compared to nearly half of Democrats (49%) and independents (46%)....

Fewer Americans today say it is important that the candidate they are supporting for president has strong religious beliefs. Currently, a majority of the public says it is either very (29%) or somewhat (29%) important that a candidate has strong religious beliefs. Four in ten (40%) Americans say this is not too important or not at all important to them in making their voting decision. In 2011, nearly two-thirds (66%) of the public said it was important to them that the candidate they were supporting has strong religious beliefs, including 39% who said it was very important....

Among every religious group fewer say that having strong religious beliefs is a priority in a candidate for president, but white evangelical Protestants have shifted their views more than any other group. Today fewer than half (49%) of white evangelical Protestants say it is very important that a candidate have strong religious beliefs, while nearly two-thirds (64%) expressed this view in 2011. Today, roughly one-third (34%) of Catholics and one in five (20%) white mainline Protestants say strong religious beliefs are very important in a candidate. In 2011, four in ten (40%) Catholics and nearly three in ten (29%) white mainline Protestants said this quality was very important in a candidate for president. Even religiously unaffiliated Americans are less likely to say that strong religious beliefs are very important today than in 2011 (7% vs. 16%, respectively).

Apartment Owner Sued Over Rental Discrimination Against Muslims

The New Jersey Division on Civil Rights yesterday announced the filing of a lawsuit in state court charging the owner of an apartment building with discriminatory refusal to rent to Muslims. The complaint (full text) in Porrino v. Greda, (NJ Super., filed 10/19/2016), details the Division's use of testers after receiving a complaint from a Muslim woman.

Suit Challenges University's Anti-Harassment Policy

A suit was filed this week in an Iowa federal district court challenging the constitutionality of Iowa State University's anti-harassment policy and the required online anti-harassment training program for all students and staff.  The Student Code of Conduct defines discriminatory harassment as:

unwelcome behavior directed at an individual or group of individuals based on race, ethnicity, pregnancy, color, religion, national origin, physical or mental disability, age, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, genetic information, status as a U.S. veteran (disabled, Vietnam, or other), or other protected class when the behavior has the purpose or effect of substantially interfering with the student's education or employment by creating an intimidating, hostile, or demeaning environment.

Harassment may include some instances of First Amendment protected speech.  The complaint (full text) in Dunn v. Leath, (SD IA, filed 10/17/2016), alleges that the policy violates students' free speech, due process, equal protection and free exercise rights. The complaint reads in part:

131. Plaintiff seeks to exercise his sincerely held religious beliefs by discussing and advocating for his Christian faith and his Christian viewpoint on marriage, sexuality, abortion, and other issues in controversy.

132. Defendants’ promulgation and enforcement of each of the policies complained of herein substantially burden Dunn’s free exercise of religion by preventing and chilling him from sharing his religious views.

... 134. This policy is neither neutral nor generally applicable because it punishes speech critical of another religious belief or deemed offensive to listeners because of their religious beliefs while not sanctioning other speech.

ADF issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

Court Approves Contentious Annexation By Kiryas Joel

As reported by the New York Law Journal, a New York state trial court judge last week, in a 97-page decision, upheld actions by the municipalities involved to allow the Village of Kiryas Joel-- inhabited almost entirely by Satmar Hasidic Jews-- to annex 164 acres of land from the Town of Monroe. Respondents contended that opposition to the annexation was motivated by anti-Semitism. Petitioners argued that the annexation reflected Kiryas Joel's desire to engage in religious segregation and to encourage an in-migration of residents from the Hasidic Jewish community in Brooklyn.  While much of the court's opinion dealt with the adequacy of the environmental review involved, the court also dealt with Establishment Clause claims and allegations of discrimination.  In Village of South Blooming Grove v. Village of Kiryas Joel Board of Trustees, (Orange Cnty. Sup. Ct., Oct. 11, 2016), the court held that the individual and organizational challengers lack standing to raise an Establishment Clause claim, and even if they had standing their claim would fail on the merits, saying in part:

The fact that most of the Village's residents belong to the same religious community does not extinguish the secular purpose of the annexation.

The court also rejected petitioners' claim that the annexation violated a provision in the Town of Monroe Ethics Code that prohibits causing voluntary segregation, saying that this is a provision that only applies to recruitment of personnel.

France's Le Pen Would Extend Ban On Religious Symbols In Public

In France, right-wing National Front Party leader Marine Le Pen told a TV station this week that if she is elected President next year, she will extend to all public places the ban on "conspicuous religious symbols" like Muslim headscarves that now applies to public schools. As reported today by New Europe, Le Pen says the ban will include the kippah (skullcap) worn by many observant Jews.  She explained:

It is clear that kippahs are not the issue within our country. But for the sake of equality, they should be prohibited. If I requested to ban solely Muslim attire, people would slam me for hating Muslims.

I know it’s a sacrifice, but I think the situation is too serious these days… I think every French person, including our Jewish compatriots, can understand that if we ask them for a sacrifice in order to help fight against the advance of this Islamic extremism… they will make the effort, they will understand, I am absolutely convinced because it will be in the best interests of the nation.

The French Jewish community has condemned Le Pen's proposal. Washington Times surveys Le Pen's chances in the election.

Court Denies Preliminary Injunction In Church's Challenge To State Transgender Nondiscrimination Laws

In Fort Des Moines Church of Christ v. Jackson, (SD IA, Oct. 14, 2016), an Iowa federal district court refused to issue a preliminary injunction to bar enforcement against a church of  provisions of the Iowa Civil Rights Act and the Des Moines City Code.  The laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity in places of public accommodation. Both statutes exempt religious acts of religious institutions.  The church sued after the Iowa Civil Rights Commission issued a guide stating that the anti-discrimination provisions may apply to non-religious activities of a church that are open to the public. The church wants to publicize on its website and in its church bulletin its policy of limiting its rest rooms on the basis of anatomy as identified at birth or by one's original birth certificate.  The policy includes the following rationale:

This policy is consistent with and required by God’s Word, which sets forth the distinctiveness, complementariness and immutability of the male sex and female sex as Jesus Christ himself taught in Matthew 19:4. God’s Word also teaches that physical privacy and personal modesty spring from the physical conditions and unique characteristics of the sexes.

While refusing to dismiss the lawsuit, the court also denied a preliminary injunction because plaintiff is unlikely to succeed on the merits. The court rejected plaintiff's vagueness challenge, and rejected its as-applied free speech challenge because it is unlikely that the laws would ever apply to plaintiff's activities. All of the activities the church indicated it engaged in were religious in nature.  The court rejected plaintiff's free exercise challenge because the anti-discrimination provisions are neutral laws of general applicability. (See prior related posting.)

Suit Charges FLDS Towns With Discrimination Against Non-FLDS Members

The FLDS-controlled towns of Colorado City, Arizona and Hilldale, Utah, along with the FLDS Church, were sued last week in federal district court for discriminating against non-members of the Church. The allegations in the complaint (full text) in Prairie Farms. L.L.C. v. Town of Colorado City, (D AZ, filed 10/12/2016) are summarized in a news article from the Phoenix New Times:

Alleged illegal arrests by a cult-run police force have spurred a new federal lawsuit against two polygamous towns on the Arizona-Utah border.

Three businessmen who are former members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints allege ... that officials in the rural towns ... violated their constitutional rights. They claim the officers with the Colorado City/Hildale marshal's office arrested two of them for trespassing on land they were leasing, that the marshal's office failed to investigate reports of vandalism on the leased land, and that Colorado City officials refused to provide water and garbage services to the property.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Jeffrey A. Redding, Shamim Ara and the Divorce Politics of a Secular and Modern India, (October 8, 2016).
• Shamsul Falaah, Theocratic Constitutionalism: A Discourse on the Political System, Democracy, Judiciary and Human Rights Under Islamic Theocratic Constitutionalism, (Waikato Islamic Studies Review, Vol. 2, No. 2, 2016).
• Sahar F. Aziz, The Headscarf Debates: Conflicts of National Belonging (Book Review), Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews, Vol. 45, Iss. 2, p. 204-206, 2016.
• Guido Calabresi & Eric S, Fish, Federalism and Moral Disagreement, (Minnesota Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Douglas NeJaime & Reva Siegel, What Obergefell v. Hodges Should Have Said, Concurring Opinion, (in What Obergefell v. Hodges Should Have Said (Jack Balkin ed., 2017 Forthcoming).
• Katherine M. Franke, Opinion of Justice Katherine Franke in Obergefell v. Hodges, (inWhat Obergefell Should Have Said (Yale U. Press 2017), Jack Balkin ed., Forthcoming).
• Ben Boer, Culture, Rights and the Post-2015 Development Agenda, (Heritage, Culture and Rights: Challenging Legal Discourses, A. Durbach, L. Lixinski, eds, Hart Publishing, UK, Forthcoming).
• Christoph Engel, The Solidarity Motive, (MPI Collective Goods Preprint, No. 2016/14 (2016)).

From SmartCILP:

• Special Issue: Islamic Law: Its Sources, Interpretation, Its Economics, Finance and the Translation Between It and Laws Written in English. Articles by Rafat Y. Alwazna, Abdul-Hakim Al-Matroudi, Mustafa Shah, Ramon Harvey, Shafi Fazaluddin, Valentino Cattelan, Sami Al-Daghistani, Abbas Mehregan, Daniel Vazquez-Paluch, Fahad Al-Zumai, Mohammed Al-Wasmi and Hanem El-Farahaty. 29 International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 251-501 (2016).

European Court Rules On Jurisdiction In Annulment Action By Third Party

Last week, the Court of Justice of the European Union issued an interpretation of European Council regulations on judicial cooperation in civil matters in the context of an extremely unusual annulment action.  Edyta Mikołajczyk (EM) is heir to the estate of Zdzisława Czarnecka (ZC), first wife of Stefan Czarnecki (SC).  SC died apparently in 2012. ZC died in 1999.  SC had remarried in 1956, to Marie Louise Czarnecka (MLC). In a suit in Poland, EM brought an action to annul SC's second marriage to MLC, claiming that SC's first marriage to ZC had not been dissolved at the time of his marriage to MLC.  If successful, this would presumably mean that EM stands to inherit a larger portion of SC's estate than otherwise.  In Mikołajczyk v. Czarnecka, (CJEU, Oct. 13, 2016), the Court of Justice held that its regulation on recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters applies to an action for annulment of marriage brought by a third party following the death of one of the spouses.  However, the Court of Justice went on to hold that under the jurisdictional provisions of the regulation, the annulment action should have been brought in France, where SC and MLC had lived, and not in Poland where EM resides. Law & Religion UK has more on the decision.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Garner v. Muenchow, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141335 (ED WI, Oct. 12, 2016), a Wisconsin federal district court dismissed an inmate's complaint that correctional officers treated Muslim inmates differently than others in access to vendor catalogs to order religious items and access to a Qur'an from the chapel.

In Annabel v. Michigan Department of Corrections, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142269 (WD MI, Oct. 14, 2016), a Michigan federal district court dismissed a broad series of claims of mistreatment by a Jewish inmate, including harassment on the basis of his religion and interferences with his kosher diet.

In Hamilton v. Deputy Warden, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142299 (SD NY, Oct. 13, 2016), a New York federal district court, while dismissing many claims, allowed a Muslim inmate to move ahead with his complaint against one defendant that he was denied access to religious services.

In Bullock v. Mitchell, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142624 (WD NC, Oct. 13, 2016), a North Carolina federal district court dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies an inmate's complaint that authorities were attempting to reclassify the Moorish Science Temple of America as a gang and its members as "security threat individuals."

In Wilcox v. Brown, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142625 (WD NC, Oct. 13, 2016, a North Carolina federal district court dismissed an inmate's complaint that Rastafarian services were suspended.