Washington Supreme Court Hears Arguments In Florist's Refusal of Flowers For Gay Wedding

The state of Washington's Supreme Court yesterday heard oral arguments in Ingersoll v. Arlene's Flowers, Inc.  At issue is a decision by a state trial court holding that a florist shop and its owner violated the Washington Law Against Discrimination and the state's Consumer Protection Act when the shop's owner advised a customer that for religious reasons she could not provide flower arrangements for his same-sex wedding ceremony. (See prior posting.) The oral arguments (video of full arguments) were heard by the Court sitting at Bellevue College, where the justices the prior day visited with students and spoke to classes.

AP reports at length on the oral arguments, including a report on this exchange at the beginning of appellant's presentation:

"A Muslim graphics designer should not be compelled to create designs promoting a Jewish Friends of Israel group, a gay public relations manager shouldn't be forced to promote the Westboro Baptist Church, and a Christian floral designer shouldn't be forced to create custom wedding designs for a wedding that is not between one man and one woman," Stutzman's attorney, Kristin Waggoner, told the court.

Waggoner immediately ran into questions. Justice Susan Owens brought up the state's first and only black justice, the recently deceased Charles Z. Smith, who had to stay in separate hotels from other attorneys when he traveled the country while working for the Justice Department in the 1960s.

"How is this different?" Owens asked. "Because I'm sure some of the owners of those hotels would profess they had strongly held religious beliefs that prohibited racial integration."

For one thing, Waggoner responded, renting out a hotel room isn't a form of artistic expression or speech deserving of protection. Stutzman's floral arrangements do constitute expression protected by the Constitution, the lawyer said, and the government can't compel that expression.

Alliance Defense Fund has a case page with links to the pleadings, briefs and opinions in the case.

Court Holds Title VII Applies To Sexual Orientation Discrmination

In U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Scott Medical Health Center, (WD PA, Nov. 4, 2016), a Pennsylvania federal district court held that Title VII's ban on discrimination because of sex prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.  The court said in part:

That someone can be subjected to a barrage of insults, humiliation, hostility and/or changes to the terms and conditions of their employment, based upon nothing more than the aggressor’s view of what it means to be a man or a woman, is exactly the evil Title VII was designed to eradicate. Because this Court concludes that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is a subset of sexual stereotyping and thus covered by Title VII’s prohibitions on discrimination “because of sex"....

An EEOC press release discusses the decision.

British Court Says Sex Segregated Religious Schools OK Under Equality Act

In Interim Executive Board of X School v Chief Inspector of Education, Children's Services And Skills, (EWHC (Admin), Nov. 8. 2016), a British trial court held that sex-segregated classes from the 5th grade on in an Islamic school do not violate the Equality Act 2010. In reaching its conclusion, the court distinguished U.S. Supreme Court case of Brown v. Board of Education. The High Court judge said in part:

The essence of her case is that "making separate but equal provisions for boys and girls (or blacks and whites, or heterosexuals and lesbians and gay men etc.) cannot be divorced from the historic and current societal treatment of the less powerful group." Put another way, but to the same effect, segregation has the tendency to promote social and cultural stereotypes about the role of women in society....

Insofar as segregation on the ground of sex is practised in mixed schools in the UK, it is a practice carried out by a minority of schools with a Jewish, Christian and Islamic ethos, with the full participation of parents.

In short, segregation in mixed schools in this country is not the practice of government; it cannot be envisaged as any reflection of the mores and attitudes of wider society; it is only capable of being seen as a reflection of the mores, attitudes, cultures and practices of the faith groups who have been permitted to do it.

Law & Religion UK has more on the case.

Suit Challenging Social Media Policing of Anti-Islamist Posts Is Dismissed

In American Freedom Defense Initiative v. Lynch, (D DC, Nov. 9, 2016), the DC. federal district court dismissed a suit against the federal government by two anti-Islamist organizations and their leaders, including well-known activist Pamela Geller.  The groups complain that Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter have repeatedly removed their postings.  They sue the U.S. Attorney General seeking a declaratory judgment that Sec. 230 of the Communications Decency Act is unconstitutional.  That section protects social media sites from liability for policing content to remove objectionable material.  Plaintiffs contend that if Sec. 230 were held unconstitutional, the sites would no longer censor their posts.  The court dismissed for lack of standing, holding that any impact of a declaratory judgment here is speculative, and at most would only indirectly affect the behavior of social media companies.

2015 Hate Crime Data Released

Yesterday, the FBI released its report on Hate Crime Statistics 2015. The ADL which follows hate crime data closely has compiled a summary of the new report's findings and of changes from 2014:

Reported hate crime incidents increased seven percent – from 5,479 to 5,850.

Religion-based crimes increased twenty-three percent, from 1,014 in 2014 to 1,244 in 2015.  Crimes directed against Jews increased nine percent; 53 percent of the total number of reported religion-based crimes were directed against Jews and Jewish institutions.

Reported crimes against Muslims increased 67 percent, from 154 in 2014 to 257 in 2015.  257 anti-Muslim hate crimes is the second most reported against Muslims ever – second only to the backlash crimes in 2001, after the 9/11 terrorist incidents.

In 2015, crimes directed against LGBT people increased almost four percent, from 1,017 to 1,053 – and, in just the third year of data collection on crimes directed against individuals on the basis of their gender identity, the numbers increased from 98 in 2014 to 114 in 2015 – now almost two percent of all hate crimes.

14, 997 law enforcement agencies in the United States participated in the 2015 data collection effort – a decrease from 15,494 participating agencies in 2014.....  88 percent of all participating police agencies affirmatively reported zero (0) hate crimes to the FBI (including at least 66 cities over 100,000)....

There were 18 hate crime murders reported in 2015, the most since 1994, and the second most over all 25 years of data collection.

... [T]his is the first year for anti-Sikh, anti-Hindu, and anti-Arab hate crimes (anti-Mormon and anti-Eastern Orthodox and other religious denominations, too.  The anti-Eastern Orthodox crimes were the largest reported in this new category – 48 in 2015)....

[Thanks to Michael Lieberman for the ADL data.]

Supreme Court Denies Review In Prof's Religious Speech Case

The U.S. Supreme Court today denied certiorari in Payne v. University of Southern Mississippi, (Docket No. 16-290, cert. denied 11/14/2016) (Order List).  In the case, a Mississippi federal district court held that the 1st Amendment does not preclude a faculty member at a public university being disciplined for religious speech made as part of his duties as a professor. (See prior posting.) The decision was affirmed at 643 Fed. Appx. 409 (5th Cir., April 12, 2016).

Donald Trump On His SCOTUS Appointment, Abortion Rights and Marriage Equality

Last night, CBS' "60 Minutes" broadcast an hour-long interview (full text and video) by Leslie Stahl with President-elect Donald Trump and with members of his family. Portions of the interview dealt with the impact of his Supreme Court nomination on abortion rights and marriage equality. Here are excerpts from the interview:

Lesley Stahl: One of the things you’re going to obviously get an opportunity to do, is name someone to the Supreme Court. And I assume you’ll do that quickly?

Donald Trump: Yes. Very important.

Lesley Stahl: During the campaign, you said that you would appoint justices who were against abortion rights. Will you appoint-- are you looking to appoint a justice who wants to overturn Roe v. Wade?

Donald Trump: So look, here’s what’s going to happen-- I’m going to-- I’m pro-life. The judges will be pro-life. They’ll be very—

Lesley Stahl: But what about overturning this law--

Donald Trump: Well, there are a couple of things. They’ll be pro-life, they’ll be-- in terms of the whole gun situation, we know the Second Amendment and everybody’s talking about the Second Amendment and they’re trying to dice it up and change it, they’re going to be very pro-Second Amendment. But having to do with abortion if it ever were overturned, it would go back to the states. So it would go back to the states and--

Lesley Stahl: Yeah, but then some women won’t be able to get an abortion?

Donald Trump: No, it’ll go back to the states.

Lesley Stahl: By state—no some --

 Donald Trump: Yeah.

Donald Trump: Yeah, well, they’ll perhaps have to go, they’ll have to go to another state.

Lesley Stahl: And that’s OK?

Donald Trump: Well, we’ll see what happens. It’s got a long way to go, just so you understand. That has a long, long way to go....

***

Lesley Stahl: Well, I guess the issue for [the LGBTQ community] is marriage equality. Do you support marriage equality?

Donald Trump: It-- it’s irrelevant because it was already settled. It’s law. It was settled in the Supreme Court. I mean it’s done.

Lesley Stahl: So even if you appoint a judge that--

Donald Trump: It’s done. It-- you have-- these cases have gone to the Supreme Court. They’ve been settled. And, I’m fine with that.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Steven Douglas Smith, Naturalism and the Trajectory of History, (San Diego Legal Studies Paper No. 16-229 (2015)).
• Charles J. Reid, Same Sex Unions and the Catholic Church: How Law and Doctrine Evolve, (U of St. Thomas (Minnesota) Legal Studies Research Paper No. 16-27, 2016).
• Rinie Steinmann, The Core Meaning of Human Dignity, (Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal, Vol. 19, 2016).
• Choice Ubangha, Hate Speech in Cyberspace: Why Education is Better than Regulation, (April 12, 2016).
• Robert J. Delahunty, An Epitaph for ISIS? The Idea of a Caliphate and the Westphalian Order, (U of St. Thomas (Minnesota) Legal Studies Research Paper No. 16-25, 2016).

Church Entitled To Hearing On Religious Liberty Defense To Day Care Licensing

In Our Lady of Victory Catholic Church v. Department of Human Services, (PA Commonw. Ct., Oct. 31, 2016), a 3-judge panel of the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court held that the Pennsylvania Department of Human Services has authority to issue cease and desist orders to enforce its regulations requiring any daycare center that cares for seven or more children to obtain a certificate of compliance.  However the court remanded for an evidentiary hearing the church's claim that requiring a certificate of compliance for its preschool (which it claims is part of its religious ministry) infringes its free exercise rights under the federal and state constitutions and under Pennsylvania's Religious Freedom Protection Act.  The Legal Intelligencer reports on the decision.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Omaro v. O'Connell, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153846 (WD NY, Nov. 4, 2016), a New York federal district court granted summary judgment to a Muslim inmate, finding that his free exercise rights were infringed when he was wrongly removed from the Ramadan call out meal schedule. The court referred the case to a magistrate judge for a settlement conference on damages.  The court dismissed plaintiff's equal protection challenge.

In Holmes v. Engleson, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 155201 (ND IL, Nov. 9, 2016), an Illinois federal district court refused to dismiss an inmate's complaint that his dreadlocks and beard that he wore for religious reasons were shaved against his will.

In Simmons v. Hulette, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 155721 (ND CA, Nov. 9, 2016), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed with leave to amend an inmate's complaint that he has been denied a traditional Lakota Inipi Purification Ceremony, access to a drum circle and talking circle, medicine and materials for ceremonies and a competent spiritual adviser.

In Cooper v. Bower, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 155988 (WD KY, Nov. 9, 2016), a Kentucky federal district court allowed an inmate to move ahead with his complaint that he was not allowed to receive a copy of the Qur'an that had been purchased for him by a relative instead of from funds in his inmate account.

In Yaacov v. Mohr, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156199 (ND OH, Nov. 10, 2016), an Ohio federal district court dismissed a Jewish inmate's complaint that he is unable to obtain kosher vegan meals.

In Parkerson v. Ferns, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156210 (D OR, Nov. 10, 2016), an Oregon federal district court dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and inmate's complaint that he was suspended from receiving kosher meals because he ate non-kosher food from the commissary as well.

In Tilmon v. Keith, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156512 (WD LA, Sept. 14, 2016), a Louisiana federal magistrate judge dismissed a Muslim inmate's complaint that in 2012 he was unable to observe Eid ul Adha. However he was permitted to proceed with his claim that unwanted exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke and synthetic marijuana smoke interfered with his ability to pray.

Muslim Nanny Sues Actor Couple

According to The Wrap, in a suit filed in Los Angeles Superior Court on Thursday, Sarah Alaseri (a young Muslim woman) is seeking damages for religious discrimination (as well as sexual harassment) against actor Steve Howey and his wife Sarah Shahi.  Alaseri was employed by the couple as a nanny. The suit claims that Howey and Shahi ridiculed Alaseri's religious beliefa and practices-- including mocking her for dressing modestly, fasting and wearing a headscarf when praying.

More On Presidential Voting By Religious Groupings

Earlier this week, the Pew Research Center, using exit polls, published How the faithful voted: A preliminary 2016 analysis.  It breaks down the vote in last Tuesday's Presidential election by faith group.  The group giving Donald Trump the largest percentage-- 81%-- of their vote were described in the survey as "White born-again/ evangelical Christians". The category overlaps some of the other categories reported: Protestant/ other Christian- 58%; White Catholic- 60%. Groups giving Trump the lowest percentage of their votes were: Jewish- 24%; Hispanic Catholic- 26%; Religiously unaffiliated- 26%.

In the same vein, yesterday the New York Times posted an article titled Religious Right Believes Donald Trump Will Deliver on His Promises, saying in part:

Now that he has won, evangelical leaders say they are confident Mr. Trump will deliver on the political promises he made to them. These include appointing a conservative to the Supreme Court, defunding Planned Parenthood, protecting businesses that refuse to provide services for same-sex weddings and rescinding the mandate in the Affordable Care Act that requires insurance coverage for birth control.

And with Gov. Mike Pence of Indiana, an evangelical with a record of legislating against abortion and same-sex marriage, as vice president, Christian leaders say they feel reassured they will have access to the White House and a seat at the table.

U.S. Muslim Leaders Urge Messages of Hope At Friday Prayers

A press release yesterday from CAIR urged Muslim prayer leaders and imams to address post-presidential election anxieties in sermons during their regular Friday prayer services today. An outline of talking points for leaders prepared by Sh. Omar Suleiman, president of the Yaqeen Institute for Islamic Research in Texas, was included. Here are some excerpts:

We have to come to terms with the idea that will be faced with some level of hardship with our faith regardless of the circumstances. Part of ending harm towards the community collectively is individually being ready to dispel stereotypes. In Makkah, the public display of the faith was the protest of the Companions. We must also continue to publicly be unapologetically Muslim....

It’s very easy for us to say that they all hate us, and there is no good left in the people. Instead let us remind ourselves that the Prophet (peace be upon him) prayed for the people most sincerely when their rejection for him was most severe. He prayed for them at Ta’if when they struck him in the face, and at Uhud when they almost killed him....

The under 25 voters were almost unanimous in expressing what type of America they wanted to live in. And it is not one of bigotry or xenophobia. We have to make sure we continue to invest in the younger generation so that they don’t repeat the mistakes of the past (and in this case, the present). We must continue to build institutions that will stand for justice and peace for generations to come. The Day of Judgment has not come yet, and even if it had, we would still be required to finish planting what is in our hands.

Suit Challenges University's Service Learning Requirements

A suit filed yesterday in a Wisconsin federal district court challenges the constitutionality of the University of Wisconsin, Eau Claire's service learning program.  All students must complete 30 hours of community service in order to graduate; however activities that directly involve promoting religious doctrine, proselytizing, or worship are not eligible for credit. The complaint (full text) in Liebl v. Schmidt, (WD WI, filed 11/10/2016), alleges that the two students who are bringing suit were not allowed to count time teaching religious education classes to children as community service, while students could receive service-learning credit for a variety of activities that involve non-religious instruction or non-religious persuasion and recruitment. The suit alleges that this policy violates plaintiffs' 1st and 14th Amendment rights. ADF issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

Chabad Files RLUIPA Lawsuit In New Jersey Town

North Jersey.com reports on a RLUIPA lawsuit filed Nov. 1 by an Orthodox Jewish Chabad group against the mayor, property maintenance officer and Zoning Board of Adjustment of Woodcliff Lake, New Jersey. The suit challenges denials of variances and waivers by the zoning board which Chabad sought in order to build a house of worship on its property. According to the report:

The lawsuit ... allege[s] that the congregation has been the victim of a "targeted effort" to block them from developing a house of worship in Woodcliff Lake - something that the congregation alleges has caused "unjustified fear" and "prejudice" of Orthodox Jews. Chabad also alleges that Mayor Carlos Rendo made various statements that Chabad was attempting to "turn the borough into a little Jerusalem" and that the "town will be littered with black hats walking the town on Saturdays," (a reference to Hassidic Orthodox Jews.)

10th Circuit: Ten Commandments Monument Violates Establishment Clause

In Felix v. City of Bloomfield, (10th Cir., Nov. 9, 2016), the U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the district court (see prior posting) that a Ten Commandments monument erected by a former city councilman on the Bloomfield, New Mexico city hall lawn violates the Establishment Clause. Among other things, the court held that plaintiffs who are polytheistic Wiccans demonstrated sufficient injury to have standing even though they only saw the monument and never read the text on it. The court went on to hold:

The apparent purpose and context of the Monument’s installation would give an objective observer the impression of official religious endorsement. In arriving at this conclusion, we examine the text of the Monument, its placement on the lawn, the circumstances of its financing and installation, and the timing of this litigation.

It held that disclaimers on and around the monument failed to "negate the more powerful statement of endorsement conveyed by a decision to place the Monument on government land." Nor did the later addition of a number of secular monuments cure the violation.

Down-Ballot Results of Interest

In a pre-election post I identified several down-ballot contests that were of interest to those following religious issues. Here are the results from yesterday in those contests:

1. Oklahoma Question 790 that would have amended the state constitution to eliminate the ban on use of public funds to support religious institutions was defeated-- 43% yes and 57% no.
2. Missouri Constitutional Amendment 3 that would have imposed a cigarette tax to fund early childhood initiatives and would have exempted grants in the program from the ban on use of funds to support religious entities was defeated 59% to 41%.
3. Montana Supreme Court candidate Kristen Juras whose conservative Christian religious beliefs became a campaign issue was defeated 56% to 44%.
4. Ohio District 37 state legislature candidate Casey Weinstein sho had been a plaintiff in a suit against the U.S. Air Force Academy alleging Christian proselytizing lost 57% to 43%.
5. In Missouri, Republican Attorney General candidate Josh Hawley who disagrees with the state's position in the Trinity Lutheran case now before the U.S. Supreme Court in which the state denied a playground grant to a church on state constitutional grounds won 59% to 41%.

Some Early Press Reactions To Trump's Surprise Victory

For Religion Clause readers, here are some early press reactions to Donald Trump's unexpected win in yesterday's presidential election that may be of interest:

• Evangelicals Hand Victory To Donald Trump (Christianity Today).
• Trump's Win, the Greatest Victory for anti-Semitism in America Since 1941 (Haaretz).
• Mixed reaction to Trump from prominent Muslim Americans (AlJazeera).
• Vatican prays Trump presidency will promote peace amid conflict (Catholic News Agency).
• The End of Roe v. Wade Is Now a Real Possibility (Cosmopolitan).

Priest's Anti-Abortion Video Raises Questions On Limits For Advocacy

On Sunday just ahead of Tuesday's presidential election, Rev. Frank Pavone, national director of the activist anti-abortion group Priests for Life, posted a live video on Facebook which, as reported by the Washington Post, "raised questions for some about what is appropriate antiabortion and political activism in the church."  The video in which Pavone endorsed Donald Trump for president because of the anti-abortion Republican platform showed an actual aborted fetus on the altar. Pavone said the fetus was given to him for burial by a pathologist. In a post on the blog of the Archdiocese of New York, a spokesman strongly criticized Pavone, saying in part:

A human being has been sacrificed and the altar of God has been desecrated, all for politics. Everyone who respects the dignity of every human person should reject and disavow this atrocity.

A post on Friendly Atheist blog includes a link to Pavone's full 44 minute video.

Another Court Challenge To HHS Rules On Medical Services For Transgender Individuals

Following on a lawsuit filed in August (see prior posting), yesterday a lawsuit was filed by different plaintiffs challenging new rules (full text) adopted by the Department of Health and Human Services in May.  The rules bar discrimination on the basis of gender identity in the delivery of medical services by, among others, health facilities receiving federal financial assistance.  The complaint (full text) in Religious Sisters of Mercy v. Burwell, (D ND, filed 11/7/2016), filed by a religious order, a health care system, a Catholic university with a nursing program, and the state of North Dakota, alleges that the new rules violate various statutory and constitutional provisions. It says in part:

The Regulation not only forces healthcare professionals to violate their medical judgment, it also forces them to violate their deeply held religious beliefs.... The Regulation also undermines the longstanding sovereign power of States such as North Dakota to regulate healthcare, ensure appropriate standards of medical judgment, and protect its citizens’ constitutional and civil rights.

Becket Fund issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.