Report Claims Religious Liberty Arguments Are Being Used To Stifle Civil Rights

Political Research Associates, an organization devoted to challenging the right and advancing social justice, this week issued a report written by Jay Michaelson titled Redefining Religious Liberty-- The Covert Campaign Against Civil Rights. The Report's Executive Summary reads in part:

A highly-active, well-funded network of conservative Roman Catholic intellectuals and evangelicals are waging a vigorous challenge to LGBTQ and reproductive rights by charging that both threaten their right-wing definition of “religious liberty.” The Christian Right campaign to redefine “religious liberty” has been limiting women’s reproductive rights for more than a decade and has recently resulted in significant religious exemptions from antidiscrimination laws, same-sex marriage laws, policies regarding contraception and abortion, and educational policies. Religious conservatives have succeeded in reframing the debate, inverting the victim-oppressor dynamic, and broadening support for their agenda.

While the religious liberty debate is a growing front in the ongoing culture wars, it is actually an old argument repurposed for a new context. In the postwar era, the Christian Right defended racial segregation, school prayer, public religious displays, and other religious practices that infringed on the liberties of others by claiming that restrictions on such public acts infringed upon their religious liberty. Then as now, the Christian Right turned antidiscrimination arguments on  their heads: instead of African Americans being discriminated against by segregated Christian universities, the universities were being discriminated against by not being allowed to exclude them; instead of public prayers oppressing religious minorities, Christians are being oppressed by not being able to offer them.

Iowa Absentee Voting During Church Services Concerns ACLU

Iowa law provides that county auditors may approve satellite absentee voting stations at which voters can cast an absentee ballot prior to election day. Today's Des Moines Register reports that for the first time, two Ames Iowa churches will host absentee voting during church services. The Iowa ACLU is concerned about the move, especially because of the church-based campaign in Iowa to unseat state Supreme Court justices over their decision striking down the ban on same-sex marriage. (See prior posting.) However church representatives say they will not instruct their members how to vote.  Apparently the move to have churches host satellite voting was initiated by county auditor Mary Mosiman, not by the churches. Three other churches will also host satellite voting, but not during the time of church services.

Virginia Governor Vetoes "Religious Freedom" Bill As Discriminatory

As he had promised, Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe, a Democrat, yesterday vetoed Senate Bill 41 that protected clergy, religious and religiously affiliated organizations and their employees and volunteers acting in the scope of their employment from being required to participate in the solemnization of any marriage or from receiving adverse treatment of any kind by the state because the person acted on the basis of a sincere religious or moral belief that marriage should be only the union of one man and one woman. (See prior posting.) In his veto message (full text), McAuliffe described the bill as one that shields "those who actively discriminate against same-sex couples" from civil liability.  McAuliffe said in part:

Although couched as a “religious freedom” bill, this legislation is nothing more than an attempt to stigmatize.  Any legitimate protections  ... are duplicative of the First Amendment ...; Article I, Section 11 of the Constitution of Virginia; and the Virginia Religious Freedom Restoration Act.  Any additional protections are styled in a manner that prefers one religious viewpoint—that marriage can only validly exist between a man and a woman—over all other viewpoints.  Such a dynamic is not only unconstitutional, it equates to discrimination under the guise of religious freedom.

This legislation is also bad for business and creates roadblocks as we try to build the new Virginia economy.

Washington Times reports on the governor's action.

Justice Scalia's Opinions on Religion Clauses and Religious Issues (Updated)

The media continue to be filled with tributes to Justice Antonin Scalia who died suddenly over the week end. (See prior posting).  Religion News Service and NPR review Justice Scalia's views on religion, the religion clauses of the 1st Amendment and on social issues that have become religious flash points.

Here are links to cases involving issues of religion, religious exercise or religious speech in which Scalia wrote opinions (either majority, concurring or dissenting):

• Edwards v. Aguillard, (1987) (dissenting opinion)
• Employment Division v. Smith, (1990) (majority opinion)
• Lee v. Weisman, (1992) (dissenting opinion)
• Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah, (1993) (concurring opinion)
• Lamb's Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School District, (1993) (concurring opinion)
• Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet, (1994) (dissenting opinion).
• Capitol Square Review and Advisory Board v. Pinette, (1995) (opinion of the court)
• City of Boerne v. Flores, (1997) (concurring opinion)
• Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc. v. Village of Stratton, (2002) (concurring opinion)
• Locke v. Davey, (2004) (dissenting opinion)
• Van Orden v. Perry, (2005) (concurring opinion)
• McCreary County v. ACLU, (2005) (dissenting opinion)
• Elmbrook School District v. Doe, (2014) (dissent to denial of cert.)
• EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., (2015) (majority opinion)

Here are opinions he wrote on issues of abortion, homosexuality and same-sex marriage:

• Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, (1989) (concurring in part)
• Ohio v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health, (1990) (concurring opinion)
• Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, (1992) (concurring and dissenting)
• Shenck v. Pro-Choice Network of Western New York, (1997) (concurring and dissenting)
• Stenberg v. Carhart, (2000) (dissenting opinion)
• Lawrence v. Texas, (2003) (dissenting opinion)
• Obergefell v. Hodges, (2015) (dissenting opinion)

These lists are almost certainly incomplete.  I invite readers to continue to send along citations to others that should be added.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Howard A. Palley, The Overturning of Roe v. Wade: A Theocratic and Anti-Democratic Decision, (March 31, 2023).
• Noura Erakat, Darryl Li & John Reynolds, Race, Palestine, and International Law, (AJIL Unbound, Vol. 117, No. 2, pp. 77-81, 2023).
• Andrew M. Koppelman, Religious Liberty as a Judicial Autoimmune Disorder: The Supreme Court Repudiates its Own Authority in Kennedy v. Bremerton, (Hastings Law Review, 2023 Forthcoming).
• Joel A. Nichols, Faith and Faithfulness: Vocation as Self, Others, and a Third Thing, (Touro Law Review, Vol. 38, 2023).
• Kelley Loper, Equality, Dignity and Same-sex Marriage: Reflections on Developments in Hong Kong, 53 Hong Kong Law Journal, Forthcoming.
• Malinda L. Seymore, Adoption as a Substitute for Abortion?, (University of Colorado Law Review, Vol. 95, 2023).
• Lu-in Wang, Reframing Hate,, (Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Vol. 112, p. 847, 2022).
• Daniel Bird & Eric Maier, Wayward Samaritans: 'Non-Profit' Hospitals and Their Tax Exempt Status, (University of Pittsburgh Law Review, Forthcoming,).

From SmartCILP:

• Khaled A. Beydoun, Killing an Arab, 101 North Carolina Law Revies 207-222 (2022).
• Blaine L. Hutchison, Revisiting Employment Division v. Smith, 91 University of Cincinatti Law Review 396-436 (2022).
• Justin Burnworth, Replacing Smith with a "Graduated Scale" Approach to the Free Exercise Clause, 54 University of Toledo Law Review 1-26 (2022).

Title VII Religious Exemption Does Not Protect Against Suit Over Sexual Orientation Discrimination

 In Starkey v. Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Indianapolis, Inc., (SD IN, Oct. 21,2020), an Indiana federal district court held that a former Catholic school guidance counselor who was fired because of her same-sex marriage may bring a discrimination claim under Title VII. The court rejected the school's contention that the religious institution exemption in Title VII applies. The court said in part:

Sexual orientation is a protected class under Title VII, and the language and legislative history of Title VII indicate Congress intended that religious institutions remain subject to Title VII's prohibition on discrimination on the basis of a protected class. To be sure, this case requires a careful balancing of religious liberty and an employee's right to be free from discrimination. The proper balance is to interpret Title VII's religious exemption to allow a religious employer to make hiring decisions in favor of coreligionists without facing claims of religious discrimination, but to allow a plaintiff to bring claims of other forms of Title VII discrimination. The religious exemption does not bar Starkey's Title VII claims of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, retaliation, and hostile work environment....

So, the question then becomes: Does a religious reason for an employment decision bar a plaintiff's Title VII claim when the religious reason also implicates another protected class?  The exemption under Section 702 should not be read to swallow Title VII's rules. It should be narrowly construed to avoid reducing Title VII's expansive rights and protections.

 Indiana Lawyer reports on the decision.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Ian S. Speir, Clemency in Jewish Law, (May 18, 2010).
• Ellen P. Aprill, An Overview of Tax Issues for Synagogues (and Other Religious Congregations), (Loyola-LA Legal Studies Paper No. 2010-24, May 19, 2010).
• Kristen Stilt, How is Islam the Solution?: Constitutional Visions of Contemporary Islamists, (Texas International Law Journal, Forthcoming).
• Jeff Redding, Dignity, Legal Pluralism, and Same-Sex Marriage, (Brooklyn Law Review , Vol. 75, 2010).
• Hussin Iza, Where is the Local Online? Internet Fatwa and the Making of New Muslim Spaces, (Western Political Science Association 2010 Annual Meeting Paper).
• Mohamad Mova Al 'Afghani, Religious Freedom in Indonesia Before and after Constitutional Amendments, (Critical Thinkers For Islamic Reform, Brainbow Press, 2009).
• Michael Young, In Defense of the Constitutionality of Critically Discussing Religion and Ethics in Schools in Light of Free Exercise and Parental Rights, (Ohio State Law Journal, Vol. 70, p. 1565, 2009).
• Aziz Z. Huq, Modeling Terrorist Radicalization, Duke Journal of Law and Social Change, Forthcoming).

From SmartCILP:

• Nancy D. Perkins, Form and Norm: The Transformative Potential of Sub-National Environmental Solidarity, 20 Fordham Environmental Law Review 469-514 (2010).

Court Enjoins Community College's Sexual Harassment Policy As Overbroad

In Lopez v. Candaele, (CD CA, July 10, 2009), a California federal district court issued a preliminary injunction enjoining enforcement of Los Angeles Community College District’s Sexual Harassment Policy. The court found that the policy is overbroad, prohibiting a substantial amount of protected speech. The case grew out of a class presentation by plaintiff, in which he spoke about his religion-based opposition to same-sex marriage. His professor called him a "fascist bastard," cut his speech short, and did not enter a grade on his evaluation sheet. (See prior posting.) However ultimately plaintiff was awarded a grade of A in the course. Alliance Defense Fund issued a release applauding the ruling, saying: "Christian students shouldn't be penalized for expressing their beliefs at a public college."

Group Claims Baptist Church Violated Limits On Non-Profit Political Involvement

According to a press release yesterday from Americans United, the organization has written the Internal Revenue Service (full text of letter) asking it to investigate whether a Kentucky Baptist church has violated the rules that preclude Sec. 501(c)(3) non-profit organizations from becoming involved in political elections by endorsing or opposing candidates. At issue is the sermon delivered by Pastor Ronnie Spriggs of Hager Hill Freewill Baptist Church in Hager Hill, Kentucky in which he took issue with President Obama's backing of same-sex marriage and said:

We need to really be prayerful, and we need to get active. If you’ve ever opened your mouth, you better open it now. Between now and November, God’s people ought to thunder this country. We ought to let this country know that we will not be silent on these issues....

You know why that Obama said he believes that? Because the polls represent more people in the United States believe they ought to marry than others do. So this is an advantageous time. You know what we got to show him? There’s more saved people in the United States then he thinks there are. And if we don’t voice our opinion now, we’ll lose our country….

Recent Articles and Books of Interest

From SSRN:

• Frederick Mark Gedicks, The Religious-Question Doctrine: Free-Exercise Right or Anti-Establishment Immunity?, (Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies Research Paper No. RSCAS 2016/10, March 2016).
• Nathan B. Oman, Doux Commerce, Religion, and The Limits of Antidiscrimination Law, (Indiana Law Journal, Forthcoming).
• Shannon Gilreath & Arley Ward, Same-Sex Marriage, Religious Accommodation, and the Race Analogy, (Wake Forest Univ. Legal Studies Paper March 2016).
• Stuart Chinn, Finding Common Ground Across Race and Religion: Judicial Conceptions of Political Community in Public Schools, (Utah Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Richard Moon, The Accreditation of Trinity Western University's Law Program, (Law Matters (CBA - Alberta), Summer 2015).
• Jeremiah A. Ho, Once We're Done Honeymooning: Obergefell v. Hodges, Incrementalism, and Advances for Sexual Orientation Anti-Discrimination, (Kentucky Law Journal, Vol. 104, 2016).
• Anshul Kumar Pandey & Nilotpal Bansal, Mutilating the Past -- The Islamic State and the Last Song of History, (Februrary 19, 2016).

From SmartCILP:

• Henry L.Chambers, Jr., Telescoping and Collectivizing Religious Free Exercise Rights, 75 Maryland Law Review 392-414 (2015).
• John W. Compton, Evangelical Reform and the Paradoxical Origins of the Right to Privacy, 75 Maryland Law Review 362-382 (2015).
• Hon. Kermit V. Lipez, George Washington, Elena Kagan, and the Town of Greece, New York: The First Amendment and Religious Minorities, [Abstract], 16 Journal of Appellate Practice and Process 1-14 (2015).
• Loren F. Selznick, Running Mom and Pop Businesses By the Good Book: The Scope of Religious Rights of Business Owners, 78 Albany Law Review 1353-1392 (2014/2015).
• Symposium: Victoria Saker Woeste's Henry Ford's War on Jews and the Legal Battle Against Hate Speech. Introduction by Donna C. Schuele; essays by Aviam Soifer, Carroll Seron, Clyde Spillenger and Victoria Saker Woeste. 40 Law & Social Inquiry 1032-1079 (2015).

Recent Books:

• Daniel O. Conkle. Religion, Law, and the Constitution (Concepts and Insights Series), (Foundation Press, March 2016).
• Shanruo Ning Zhang, Confucianism in Contemporary Chinese Politics: An Actionable Account of Authoritarian Political Culture, (Lexington Books, March 2016).

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• William W. Van Alstyne, Religion in the Workplace: A Report on the Layers of Relevant Law in the United States, (Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal, Vol. 30, No. 3, 2009).
• Reid K. Weisbord & Peter DeScioli, The Effects of Donor Standing on Philanthropy: Insights from the Psychology of Gift-Giving, (Gonzaga Law Review, Vol. 45, No. 2, January 2010).

From SmartCILP:

• Charlton C. Copeland, God-Talk in the Age of Obama: Theology and Religious Political Engagement, 86 Denver University Law Review 663-691 (2009).
• Josh Goodman, Divine Judgment: Judicial Review of Religious Legal Systems in India and Israel, 32 Hastings International & Comparative Law Review 477-528 (2009).
• Robin Fretwell Wilson, Same-Sex Marriage and Religious Liberty: Life After Prop 8, 14 NEXUS 101-111 (2008-2009).

Today Is Alabama Senate Primary Runoff Between Moore and Strange

Today in Alabama, Republican voters go to the polls in the runoff U.S. Senate primary race between incumbent Luther Strange and former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore.  Moore is known for his high profile battles in which he refused to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the Alabama Supreme Court building and his defiance of the U.S. Supreme Court's same-sex marriage ruling.  Al.com reports that in his final campaign rally last night, Moore told a large crowd: "For whatever reason, God has put me in this election at this time and all of the nation is watching."

First Step in Mexico On Church-State Separation Amendment to Constitution

Business Week reports last week that the lower house of Mexico's Congress has approved a constitutional amendment that formally establishes separation of church and state. The amendment "guarantees the autonomy of institutions from religious norms, rules and convictions or individual ideologies, as well as the equality of people before the law independent of their convictions." The overwhelming vote was 363-1 with 8 abstentions. Analysts say the amendment is designed to limit the Catholic Church's influence over political decisions. The Church has criticized enactments by Mexico City legalizing first-trimester abortions, and permitting same-sex marriage and adoptions. The amendment measure still has a long way to go. It must still be approved by Mexico's Senate, signed by President Felipe Calderon and ratified by a majority of Mexico's state legislatures. [Thanks to Bob Ritter for the lead.]

Oregon Court Rejects Part Of Its Earlier Decision In Wedding-Cake Dispute

In Klein v. Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, (OR App., Jan. 26, 2022), the Oregon Court of Appeals, in a case on remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, reaffirmed its prior decision in part in a challenge to the religious refusal by a bakery (Sweetcakes by Melissa) to provide a wedding cake for a same-sex marriage. The court reaffirmed its conclusion that the refusal violates the anti-discrimination provisions of the state's public accommodation law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. It held that the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Fulton v. City of Philadelphia does not change its earlier conclusion, saying in part:

the Kleins have not demonstrated that Fulton alters our prior conclusion that ORS 659A.403 is a “generally applicable” law for purposes of Smith, nor our related conclusion that, under Smith, the application of the law to Aaron’s conduct of denying cake-making services based on sexual orientation does not violate the Kleins’ rights under the Free Exercise Clause.

The court however did set aside the damage order entered by the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, finding that, in light of the U.S. Supreme Court's Masterpiece Cakeshop decision, BOLI’s decision on damages violates the Free Exercise Clause.  The court said in part:

[T]he prosecutor’s closing argument apparently equating the Kleins’ religious beliefs with “prejudice,” together with the agency’s reasoning for imposing damages in connection with Aaron’s quotation of Leviticus, reflect that the agency acted in a way that passed judgment on the Kleins’ religious beliefs, something that is impermissible under Masterpiece Cakeshop.

The Oregonian reports on the decision.

Recent Articles and Books of Interest

From SSRN:

• Larry Catá Backer, Theocratic Constitutionalism: An Introduction to a New Global Legal Ordering, Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, Vol. 16, No. 1, 2008.


• Josh Paul Davis & Joshua D. Rosenberg, The Immanent Structure of Free Speech Doctrine: Bong Hits, Jesus, and the Role of the Public Schools in Controlling Student Speech, (August 5, 2008).


• Christopher Scott Maravilla, The Diaspora Paradox: Integrating International Legal Norms into Domestic Law to Protect the Rights of Middle Eastern Diasporas (August 2, 2008).


• Malcolm Voyce, Buddhist 'Transgressions': The Violation of Rules by Buddhist Monks, Macquarie Law Working Paper No. 2008‐23 (June 17, 2008).

From SmartCILP:

• Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain, From Pierce to Smith: the Oregon Connection and Supreme Court Religion Jurisprudence, 86 Oregon Law Review 635-656 (2007).


• Jeffrey G. Sherman, Can Religious Influence Ever Be "Undue" Influence?, 73 Brooklyn Law Review 579-644 (2008).

New Books:

• Daniel Moeckli, Human Rights and Non-Discrimination in the "War on Terror", (Oxford University Press, Jan. 24, 2008), (Table of contents and introduction from SSRN).


• Douglas Laycock, Anthony R. Picarello, Jr. & Robin Fretwell Wilson (eds.), Same-Sex Marriage and Religious Liberty, (Rowman & Littlefield, August 28, 2008), reviewed in Becket Fund release.

Senate Resolution Says "No Religious Test" Clause Bars Disqualification For K of C Membership

On Wednesday, the U.S. Senate passed Senate Resolution 19 by unanimous consent.  The Resolution was introduced by Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse in response to questions raised in connection with last month's Judiciary Committee hearing on the nomination of Brian C. Buescher for a seat on the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska. At that hearing, Senators Mazie Hirono (D-HI) and Kamala Harris (D-CA) questioned whether Buescher's membership in the Knights of Columbus would bias his consideration on issues such as abortion rights and same-sex marriage. (Background). Resolution 19 after a lengthy Preamble, provides:

That it is the sense of the Senate that disqualifying a nominee to Federal office on the basis of membership in the Knights of Columbus violates clause 3 of article VI of the Constitution of the United States, which establishes that Senators ‘‘shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support th[e] Constitution’’ and ‘‘no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States’’.

National Catholic Register reports on the Resolution.

School Counselor's Employment Agreement Sufficient To Invoke Ministerial Exception Doctrine

In Fitzgerald v. Roncalli High School, Inc., (SD IN Sept. 30, 2022), an Indiana federal district court invoked the ministerial exception doctrine to dismiss a suit brought by Michelle Fitzgerald, a Catholic high school guidance counselor who was fired after the school and the church that oversaw it learned that she was in a same-sex marriage. The court said in part:

Fitzgerald argues that Roncalli never entrusted her with religious teaching duties by raising numerous genuine factual disputes over what exactly she did at the school. She contends the record demonstrates that Roncalli entrusted her in description alone. She never engaged in religious teaching, nor did Roncalli expect her to....

[However,] Fitzgerald's employment agreement and Roncalli's description of Fitzgerald's expected duties are, alone, sufficient to resolve this case because those documents make clear that Roncalli entrusted Fitzgerald to teach the Catholic faith and carry out Roncalli's religious mission....

All this indicates Roncalli entrusted guidance counselors like Fitzgerald to convey the Church's message in addition to their secular duties. And under Seventh Circuit precedent, Fitzgerald's non-performance of these entrusted duties makes her "an underperforming minister" who may be removed pursuant to the ministerial exception.

Washington Examiner reports on the decision.

Louisiana Governor's State-Paid Trips To Churches Raise Controversy

Controversy between Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal and his critics has been escalating since an article in the New Orleans Advocate a week ago disclosed that at least 15 times this year Jindal used his state helicopter to attend church services around the state. Jindal says he also uses the occasssions to talk with local officials. (Last year, Americans United criticized similar visits by Jindal.) Rev. Welton Gaddy, president of the Interfaith Alliance, but also pastor of a Baptist Church in Monroe, Louisiana, this week wrote Jindal complaining about the taxpayer-funded trips. (Full text of letter.) He wrote in part: "For the sake of religion, please do not politicize houses of worship in Louisiana and rob those of us who minister there of the credibility that allows our faith to be a healing force in our state and across our land."

ABP reports that a Jindal spokesperson reacted to Gaddy's letter by saying : [The Interfaith Alliance] opposes putting crosses up in honor of fallen policemen, has attacked the National Day of Prayer and advocates for same-sex marriage, so it's not surprising that they are attacking the governor for accepting invitations to speak at Louisiana churches." [Thanks to Blog from the Capital for the lead.]

Recent Articles Of Interest

From SSRN:

• Jeff Redding, Proposition 8 and the Future of American Same-Sex Marriage Activism, (Nexus, Vol. 14, p. 113, 2009).
• Anne Twomey, The Australian Crowns - Changing the Rules of Succession, (Quadrant, Vol. 53, No. 6, pp. 44-47, 2009).
• Barry McDonald, Getting Beyond Religion as Science: 'Unstifling' Worldview Formation in American Public Education, (Washington and Lee Law Review, Vol. 66, 2009).
• Amy Lavine & Patricia Salkin, God and the Land: A Holy War Between Religious Exercise and Community Planning and Development, (Albany Government Law Review, Vol. 2, 2009).

From SmartCILP:

• Donald Kerwin, Toward a Catholic Vision of Nationality, 23 Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics and Public Policy 197-207 (2009).
• Craig W. Mandell, Tough Pill to Swallow: Whether Catholic Institutions Are Obligated Under Title VII to Cover Their Employees' Prescription Contraceptives, 8 University of Maryland Law Journal of Race, Religion, Gender & Class 199-239 (2008).
• Lucian C. Martinez, Jr., Sovereign Impunity: Does the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act Bar Lawsuits Against the Holy See in Clerical Sexual Abuse Cases?, 44 Texas International Law Journal 123-155 (2008).
• Nicholas A. Mirkay, Losing Our Religion: Reevaluating the Section 501(c)(3) Exemption of Religious Organizations That Discriminate, 17 William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal 715-764 (2009).
• Mark Strasser, Repudiating Everson: On Buses, Books, and Teaching Articles of Faith, 78 Mississippi Law Journal 567-636 (2009).

Release of Tapes of Prop 8 Trial Again On Hold

In the latest skirmish over California's Proposition 8-- the ballot measure that barred same-sex marriage-- a panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday issued a stay pending appeal of a district court order that authorized release of digital recordings of the original trial on Prop 8's constitutionality. (See prior posting.) Here full text of the 9th Circuit's order in Perry v. Brown. AP reported on court's action.