Retired Pope Benedict Weighs In On Clergy Sexual Abuse of Minors

This week, publications around the world published translations of an unusual essay from emeritus Pope Benedict XVI on the Church's clergy sex abuse crisis.  As reported by the Washington Post:

Breaking years of silence on major church affairs, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI has written a lengthy letter devoted to clerical sex abuse in which he attributes the crisis to a breakdown of church and societal moral teaching and says he felt compelled to assist “in this difficult hour.”

The 6,000-word letter..., laments the secularization of the West, decries the 1960s sexual revolution and describes seminaries that became filled during that period with “homosexual cliques.”

The pope emeritus, in emphasizing the retreat of religious belief and firm church teaching, provides a markedly different explanation for the abuse crisis than that offered by Pope Francis, who has often said abuse results from the corrupted power of clergy.

Catholic News Agency has published the full text in English.

New York Legislature Passes Bill To Bar Employment Discrimination Based On Religious Attire

The New York State Legislature on Tuesday gave final passage to A4024 (full text) which adds to the state's anti-discrimination law a specific ban on employment discrimination because of a person's attire, clothing, or facial hair worn in accordance  with  the requirements  of  his  or her religion. The employer is excused from this obligation if reasonable accommodation is impossible. AP, reporting on the passage of the bill, says it was particularly supported by a coalition of Sikh houses of worship. [Thanks to Blog from the Capital or the lead.]

UPDATE: New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed the bill on Aug. 9.

EEOC 2018 Data Released

The EEOC yesterday released its 2018 Fiscal Year 2018 Enforcement and Litigation Data.  During the fiscal year, he EEOC resolved 90,558 charges of discrimination and retaliation. Of these, 2,859 (3.7%) involved charges of religious discrimination.

Judge Overrules Jury Saying No Religious Discrimination By Homeowners Association Was Shown

In Morris v. West Hayden Estates First Addition Homeowners Association, Inc., (D ID, April 4, 2019), an Idaho federal district judge enjoined a Christian couple from hosting an elaborate Christmas display that violates Homeowner Association Rules. As described by the Spokane Spokesman-Review's report on the decision:

On one side, a devoutly Christian couple throwing extravagant celebrations for thousands at a home decked to the halls with 200,000 light bulbs. At times, even featuring a camel and donkey to re-create the Nativity scene.

On the opposite side, a Hayden homeowners association with specific rules that prohibited such excessive celebrations – and the noise that follows – in favor of a more modest showing of holiday spirit.

Despite a jury verdict in favor of plaintiffs, the court ruled as a matter of law that plaintiffs had not shown that the Homeowners Association discriminated against them on the basis of religion in violation of the Federal Fair Housing Act.  Plaintiff had pointed to a letter from the Homeowners Association which described rule violations that would be involved in the Christmas display.  The letter added that some of the subdivision residents are non-Christians.  The court said in part:

While January 2015 Letter was not drafted with lawyerly precision and contained a boorish reference to “undesireables,” it cannot be read as evidence that the Homeowners Association intended to discriminate against Plaintiffs because they were Christian. On this score, the Court notes that several members of the Board were practicing Christians. Furthermore, Board President Jennifer Scott is both a practicing Christian and married to a Christian minister. The Court is not suggesting that Christians cannot, per se, discriminate against other Christians. But, the fact that the Board was at least partially composed of practicing Christians significantly decreases the probability that the Board intended to discriminate against Plaintiffs based on a faith shared by both Plaintiffs and several Board members.

The court concluded that the jury was likely prejudiced by testimony which they were instructed to ignore relating to threats received by plaintiffs from other homeowners who were not Association board members.  Because the decision is likely to be appealed, the court held that if its conclusion of law was reversed, defendants should be granted a new trial or alternatively the jury's award of $75,000 in damages should be reduced to $4.

Anti-Vax Movement Targets Ultra Orthodox Jews In New York

The New York Times in an article posted yesterday reports on the ways in which the anti-vaccination movement, particularly an organization known as Parents Educating and Advocating for Children's Health ("Peach"), is targeting ultra-Orthodox Jews in New York:

Peach’s handbook — with letters signed by rabbis and sections like “Halachic Points of Interest” — has become one of the main vehicles for misinformation among ultra-Orthodox groups, including Hasidim. Its message is being shared on hotlines and in group text messages.....

The majority of ultra-Orthodox rabbis said they ... urged vaccination, citing religious scripture about protecting one’s health and the health of others.

But all of that has not been enough to persuade vaccine skeptics....

Some Hasidim have said that longstanding tension between members of the ultra-Orthodox community and the government have made them wary of officials’ efforts to contain the outbreak.

The past persecution of the Jewish people is still a factor, they said. And more recently, quarrels with secular leaders over a circumcision ritual that has transmitted fatal herpes infections to infants and the government’s oversight of ultra-Orthodox Jewish private schools known as yeshivas have only soured relations.

In Settlement Airbnb Agrees To Allow Listing of West Bank Properties

In a press release yesterday, an Israeli civil rights group announced a settlement in  Sliber v. Airbnb, one of a number of suits challenging Airbnb's decision to delist rentals in Israeli settlements in the West Bank. (See prior posting). Apparently the policy was neverin fact implemented.  Under the Settlement Agreement (full text) Airbnb will modify it policies to allow listings of all properties in the area, subject to its Terms of Service.  Sidestepping conflicting claims over claims to the West Bank, the Settlement Agreement says in part:

Airbnb takes on position on the Host-Plaintiffs' claims, or others claims, to legal title to the properties on which the accommodations are located and its standard Terms of Service requires that every Host agree and warrant not to offer any accommodation on Airbnb's platform that the Host does not own or have permission to make available for booking.

Mandatory Measles Vaccinations Ordered In Brooklyn Neighborhood

The New York City Commissioner of Health yesterday declared a public health emergency and ordered everyone who lives, works or resides in zip codes comprising the Williamsburg section of Brooklyn to be vaccinated against measles unless they already have immunity or are medically exempt (full text of order).  NBC News reports on the order.  The epicenter of the measles outbreak is in the ultra-Orthodox community of Williamsburg. Mayor Bill DeBlasio announced the order. According to a health department release:

Under the mandatory vaccinations, members of the City’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene will check the vaccination records of any individual who may have been in contact with infected patients. Those who have not received the MMR vaccine or do not have evidence of immunity may be given a violation and could be fined $1,000.

This emergency declaration comes a day after the city health department ordered yeshivas in Brooklyn to exclude all unvaccinated students from classes, or else face possible closure.

House Holds Hearing On Hate Crimes and White Nationalism

The House Judiciary Committee today held a hearing on Hate Crimes and the Rise of White Nationalism. The full text of the prepared testimony of most of the witnesses, and a video of the full four hours of hearings are available on the committee's website.

Senate Will Investigate Yale's Application of Its Non-Discrimination Policy To Public Interest Stipends

Senator Ted Cruz, Chairman of the Constitution Subcommittee of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee told Yale Law School Dean Heather Gerken in a letter (full text) sent last week that the Subcommittee is opening an investigation into the Law School's recent extension of its non-discrimination policy to summer and post-graduate public interest fellowships and loan forgiveness for public interest careers. According to Yale Daily News, the move comes in reaction to the law school's announcement:

We recently decided that the Law School will require that any employment position it financially supports be open to all of our students. If an employer refuses to hire students because they are Christian, black, veterans, or gay, we will not fund that position.

The policy change came after negative reaction, particularly by LGBTQ groups, to the Federalist Society's speaking invitation to a lawyer from Alliance Defending Freedom. In his letter, Sen Cruz said in part:

[I]t appears that the policy arose from unconstitutional animus and a specific discriminatory intent both to blacklist Christian organizations like the Alliance Defending Freedom and punish Yale students whose values or religious faith lead them to work there.

UPDATE: Here is Yale Law School's response to Sen. Cruz's letter, emphasizing that its policy only applies to hiring practices, and not to policy objectives of the organization. [Thanks to Jim Oleske for this update item].

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• L. Joe Dunman, The Devil in Recent American Law, (Pace Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Derek Ross, 'Intolerant and Illiberal'? Trinity Western University and its Implications for Charter Jurisprudence, ((2019) 89 Supreme Court Law Review (2d)).
• Paul H. Robinson, Codifying a Sharia-based Criminal Law in Developing Muslim Countries, (U of Penn Law School, Public Law Research Paper No. 19-15 (2019)).
• Meir Dan-Cohen, On the (Im)morality of the Death Penalty, (Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law, Vol. 23, 2018).
• I. Glenn Cohen, The Regulation of Reproduction and Best Interests Analysis, (The Oxford Handbook of Children and the Law (James G. Dwyer, ed. OUP, 2019)).
• Laura Portuondo, Abortion Regulation as Compelled Speech, (UCLA Law Review, Vol. 67, 2020).
• Jeremiah A. Ho, Queer Sacrifice in Masterpiece Cakeshop, (Yale Journal of Law & Feminism, Forthcoming).

State of Emergency To Combat Measles Ended By Court

As previously reported, in late March Rockland County, New York declared a state of emergency to combat a growing measles outbreak.  It banned any person under 18 who has not been vaccinated for measles from all places of public assembly. On April 3, a suit was filed in state court challenging the State of Emergency Declaration. The complaint (full text) in Doe v. Day, (Rockland Cty Sup. Ct., filed 4/3/2019), contended among other things that the Declaration will bar those with religious exemptions from vaccination requirements from celebrating Passover or Easter at their houses of worship. On Friday, a trial court judge agreed with plaintiffs.  Rockland/ Westchester Journal News reports in part:

A judge Friday halted Rockland County Executive Ed Day's emergency declaration barring children who are unvaccinated against measles from schools, places of worship and other public areas.

Acting state Supreme Court Judge Rolf Thorsen's injunction stated that the 166 cases cited by the county since the measles outbreak began last October did not rise to the level of an epidemic or constitute a disaster. Day's reliance on executive law in issuing the emergency declaration "may have been misplaced," the decision stated.

UPDATE: Here is the full text of the opinion in W.D. v. Rockland County,   (Rockland Cty. Sup. Ct., April 5, 2019) issuing a preliminary injunction against the emergency declaration. [Thanks to Eugene Volokh for the opinion.]

Clearing A Courtroom OK'd For Testimony By Muslim Woman With Uncovered Face

In Copper v. Superintendent of Sci-Greene, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59150 (ED PA, April 2, 2019), a Pennsylvania federal magistrate judge recommended rejecting a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel brought by convicted murderer Tyreese Copper.  Copper argued that his counsel should have objected that the way in which the trial judge accommodated the religious concerns of a Muslim woman who was one of the prosecution witnesses violated his right to a public trial. The witness was wearing a burqa. The trial court judge insisted that she uncover her face so that the jury could assess her credibility. The judge however agreed to clear public spectators from the courtroom while she testified with her face cover removed.

No State Action In Denial of Club Leadership Position to Mormon High Schooler

In Ayers v. Fellowship of Christian Athletes, (ED CA, April 4, 2019), a California federal district court dismissed a religious discrimination suit filed under 42 USC Sec. 1983 against against the after-school non-curricular high school club, Fellowship of Christian Athletes ("FCA") and others involved with it.  FCA met on school grounds and was sponsored by a school teacher. Plaintiff Anne Ayers complains that she was denied a leadership position in FCA because of her Mormon faith.  The court held the fact the teacher and high school principal acquiesced in the denial is not enough to make the private parties involved "state actors."

Inmate's Suit Seeks Imam In Execution Chamber

In the wake of two widely publicized U.S. Supreme Court actions involving similar issues in Alabama and Texas, suit was filed this week by a Muslim death row inmate in Alabama who wants to have an imam present in the execution chamber when when he is executed. The complaint (full text) in Burton v. Dunn, (MD AL, April 4, 2019), alleges that Charles Burton's rights under RLUIPA, the Alabama Religious Freedom Amendment, the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise clause are violated by the prison's current policy under which only the prison's mainline Protestant Christian chaplain is present in the execution chamber. Burton objects to that chaplain's presence. Stanford Law School's Legal Clinic issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit. [Thanks to James Sonne for the lead.]

Belgian Kosher Slaughter Ban Referred To European Court of Justice

As previously reported, in January Belgium's Council of State-- the country's highest court-- heard oral arguments on challenges to laws in Wallonia and Flanders that effectively ban kosher and halal slaughter by requiring animals be stunned before slaughter. Jewish News reported yesterday that the Belgian court has now referred the case to the European Court of Justice for a non-binding opinion on whether the bans are consistent with European Union law.

Suit Challenges Zoning Ban On Tarot Reading

A lawsuit was filed yesterday in a Virginia federal district court alleging that the Town of Richlands, Virginia violated plaintiff's rights in refusing to amend its zoning ordinance to allow him to operate a Tarot reading business in the town. The complaint (full text) in Mullins v. Town of Richlands, Virginia, (WD VA, filed 4/4/2019) alleges in part:

4.... Town of Richlands’ officials have used the Town’s licensing and zoning scheme to prohibit Mr. Mullins from reading Tarot as part of his business because of their disapproval of his religious views and practices.

5. Defendants’ effective prohibition on Tarot reading as part of Mr. Mullins’ business constitutes viewpoint discrimination and is an unconstitutional prior restraint.... Defendants further violate Mr. Mullins right to free exercise of religion .... Finally, Defendant Town of Richlands’ licensing and zoning scheme imposes a substantial burden on Mr. Mullins’ religious exercise in violation of RLUIPA and the Virginia Religious Freedom Act.

The complaint describes the hearing on plaintiff's zoning application:

Several local residents admonished the Town Council against amending the zoning ordinance by citing biblical scripture and warning of dire spiritual consequences for the Town if it allowed fortune telling in Richlands.

WSLS News reports on the lawsuit.

Court Says RLUIPA Claims By Mosque May Proceed

In Adam Community Center v. City of Troy, (ED MI, April 3, 2019), a Michigan federal district court refused to dismiss RLUIPA substantial burden, discrimination and unequal treatment claims brought against the city of Troy, Michigan and various of its zoning officials.  At issue was the city's denial of a zoning variance for setback requirements that would have allowed Adam Community Center to use an existing commercial building as a mosque. The court said in part:

Here, Plaintiff’s complaint sufficiently states a substantial burden claim. Plaintiff alleges that it cannot conduct prayer services in its current facility, that there are no Muslim places of worship within the City for Plaintiff and its community members to practice their religion, that there are no other properties available in the City that satisfy the City’s zoning requirements for places of worship, and that not having a place of worship within the City poses a substantial burden on its ability to engage in religious exercise. Plaintiff also alleges facts, which if true, would support its theory that the City acted with discriminatory intent and treated Plaintiff differently from other faith based organizations. Plaintiff specifically alleges that the zoning laws have not been applied neutrally to it and that commercial businesses and Christian churches are treated more favorably.

Detroit News reports on the decision.

Settlement Reached Requiring Subdivision Gates To Be Open On Sabbath

According to a press release this week from the Office of the New Jersey Attorney General, a settlement agreement has been reached in a religious discrimination suit filed with the state civil rights division:

The homeowner, Nathan Reiss, filed a discrimination complaint in 2017 against The Enclave at the Fairways in Lakewood, alleging that security measures at the adult community interfered with his ability – and the ability of his fellow Orthodox Jewish neighbors – to observe the Sabbath. Specifically, Reiss alleged, a locking electronic pedestrian gate at a community entrance near his home prevented Orthodox Jewish Sabbath observers from walking to synagogue....

Under the settlement announced today and a similar settlement reached in a case filed in federal court, the Enclave Homeowners Association has agreed to unlock the pedestrian gate on the Sabbath, and to make other scheduling accommodations for Jewish Holy Days.

Matzav reports on the settlement. [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

6th Circuit Upholds Kentucky's Abortion Informed Consent Law

In EMW Surgical Women's Center, P.S.C. v. Beshear, (6th Cir., April 4, 2019), the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 decision, rejected a 1st Amendment free speech challenge to Kentucky's Ultrasound Informed Consent Law. According to the court:

... Kentucky directs a doctor, before performing an abortion, to auscultate (or make audible) the fetal heartbeat, perform an ultrasound, and display and describe the ultrasound images to the patient.

The majority concluded:

H.B. 2—The Ultrasound Informed Consent Act—is an informed-consent statute like the statute in Casey because it provides truthful, non-misleading, and relevant information related to an abortion. The statute incidentally burdens speech only as part of Kentucky’s regulation of professional conduct. Therefore, H.B. 2 is not subject to any heightened scrutiny with respect to the doctors’ First Amendment rights, and it does not violate those rights....

Judge Donald dissented, saying in part:

The Commonwealth has coopted physicians’ examining tables, their probing instruments, and their voices in order to espouse a political message, without regard to the health of the patient or the judgment of the physician....  [T]he majority 1) conflates the undue burden and First Amendment standards, while misreading the explicit language of Casey; 2) ignores the national standards of medical care; and 3) disregards the evidence showing that H.B. 2 is not consistent with the medical practice of informed consent.

[Thanks to Tom Rutledge for the lead.]

Third Muslim Circumcision Death In Italy

AP reported yesterday on the third death in Italy since December of infant or toddler boys circumcised at home by Muslim families. Apparently Muslim immigrants sometimes have difficulty accessing circumcision services in hospitals either because of the cost or because some Italian doctors refuse to perform the procedure on boys under 4 years of age.