German Constitutional Court Says Civil Partners Must Get Same Treatment As Spouses In Tax Law

In In re the Constitutional Complaints of Mr. P, (Fed. Const. Ct. Germany, July 21, 2012), Germany's Constitutional Court held that the prior version of Germany's Gift and Inheritance Tax Act was unconstitutional under Germany's Basic Law because it treated same-sex civil partners differently than spouses in a traditional marriage. Deutsche Welle reported on the decision.

Indonesia's Constitutional Court Refuses To Criminalize All Sex Outside of Marriage

Reuters reports that Indonesia's Constitutional Court yesterday in a 5-4 decision rejected a petition seeking to expand the definition of adultery in Indonesian law to cover not just married couples, but all sexual relations outside of marriage.  The petition was filed by the conservative Family Love Alliance (AILA).  Rights activists feared that the petition was particularly aimed at the LGBT community.  The Court majority held that any change in the law is a matter for Parliament, not the court.  Currently, same-sex relations between adults is outlawed only in the province of Aceh.

Britain's Supreme Court Denies Christian Marriage Registrar Permission To Appeal

According to Pink News, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom on Monday refused permission to appeal the decision in Ladele v. London Borough of Islington. In the case the Court of Appeals of England and Wales agreed with Britain's Employment Appeals Tribunal that a Christian marriage registrar was not subjected to illegal discrimination when she was disciplined and threatened with dismissal for refusing on religious grounds to register same-sex civil partnerships. (See prior posting.) The Supreme Court said the case did not raise legal issues of "general public importance." Ladele is now considering whether to take her case to the European Court of Human Rights.

Suits Against Kim Davis Move Ahead

In two similar cases, Yates v. Davis, (ED KY, Sept. 15, 2017), and Ermold v. Davis,(ED KY, Sept. 15, 2017), a Kentucky federal district court allowed plaintiffs to move ahead with their damage actions against Rowan County, Kentucky Clerk, Kim Davis, who refused to issue them marriage licenses. Davis adopted a "no marriage license" policy because of her religious objections to issuing licenses for same-sex marriages. (See prior related posting.) While dismissing claims brought against Davis in her official capacity, the court refused to dismiss personal capacity claims against her.  It found that her refusal to issue licenses was subject to strict scrutiny. [Thanks to Tom Rutledge for the lead.]

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Alexander Volokh, Prison Vouchers, (University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Nicholas Walter, The Status of Religious Arbitration in the United States and Canada, (Santa Clara Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Sadaf Mehmood, Islam and Modern Ideologies, (2011).
• Julio C. Colon, Choice of Law and Islamic Finance, (Texas International Law Journal, Vol. 46, No. 2, 2011).
• Edward A. Zelinsky, Winn and the Inadvisability of Constitutionalizing Tax Expenditure Analysis, (Yale Law Journal Online, Vol. 121, p. 25, 2011).
• Mary Jean Dolan, The Cross National Memorial: At the Intersection of Speech and Religion, (Case Western Reserve Law Review, Vol. 61, No. 4, 2011).
• Michael Sant'Ambrogio and Sylvia A. Law, Baehr v. Lewin and the Long Road to Marriage Equality, (University of Hawaii Law Review, Vol. 33, 2011).
• Jackie Gardina, The Defense of Marriage Act, Same-Sex Relationships and the Bankruptcy Code, (May 23, 2011).
• Carolyn M. Evans and Beth Gaze, Discrimination by Religious Schools: Views from the Coal Face, (Melbourne Univeristy Law Review, Vol. 34, No. 2, 2010).

From SmartCILP:

• Conference: Laicite in Comparative Perspective. Foreword by Mark L. Movsesian; panel participation by Michael Simon, Mark L. Movsesian, and Marc O. DeGirolami, moderators; Douglas Laycock, Mark L. Movsesian, Nathalie Caron, Blandine Chelini-Pont, Rosemary C. Salomone, Emmanuel Tawil, Nina J. Crimm, Javier Martinez-Torr¢n and Elizabeth Zoller, panelists. 49 Journal of Catholic Legal Studies 1-142 (2010).

Paper Profiles Mat Staver and His Organzation Liberty Counsel

The Orlando Sentinel this weekend carries a lengthy profile of Mat Staver and his and his Christian conservative legal organization, Liberty Counsel.  Staver has recently been in the news because of his high profile representation or Rowan County, Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis who refuses to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.  Here is an excerpt from the article:

The maelstrom that formed earlier this month around Davis — an Apostolic Christian who said she was acting on her faith — involves factions Staver knows well. Liberty Counsel, a Maitland-based legal organization he founded, has spent decades representing the conservative vanguard in debates over abortion, gay marriage and religion's place in the public sphere.

In the process, the nonprofit has ballooned from a tiny venture collecting less than $200,000 in yearly donations to a multipronged organization that hauled in more than $4 million in the 2013 tax year, employs 10 staff attorneys, runs an outreach to Israel and even released its own feature film last year.

British Marriage Registrar Loses Discrimination Appeal

In London Borough of Islington v. Ladele, (EAT, published Dec. 19, 2008), Britain's Employment Appeal Tribunal reversed a lower Tribunal's decision (see prior posting) and held that a Christian marriage registrar was not subjected to illegal discrimination when she was disciplined and threatened with dismissal for refusing to register same-sex civil partnerships. In a 47-page decision, the appellate tribunal said in part:

The claimant’s complaint on this score is not that she was treated differently from others; rather it was that she was not treated differently when she ought to have been.... That is a complaint about a failure to accommodate her difference, rather than a complaint that she is being discriminated against because of that difference....

[P]art of the commitment to the promotion of equal opportunities and fighting discrimination is that employees should not be permitted to refuse to provide services to the community for discriminatory reasons.... [R]equiring the staff to act in a non-discriminatory manner was entirely rationally connected with the legitimate objective....

The council were entitled to take the view that they were not willing to connive in that practice by relieving Ms Ladele of these duties, notwithstanding that her refusal was the result of her strong and genuinely held Christian beliefs. The council were entitled to take the view that this would be inconsistent with their strong commitment to the principles of nondiscrimination and would send the wrong message to staff and service users....

The claimant's beliefs were strong and genuine and not all of management treated them with the sensitivity which they might have done. However, we are satisfied that the Tribunal erred in finding that any of the grounds of discrimination was made out.

BBC News reported on the decision on Friday. The Christian Institute issued a release stating that claimant Lillian Ladele plans to appeal to the Court of Appeal.

DC Court Upholds Election Board's Rejection of Initiative To Define Marriage

In Jackson v. District of Columbia Board of Elections and Ethics, (DC Super. Ct., Jan. 14, 2010), the District of Columbia Superior Court agreed with the D.C. election board's rejection of an initiative petition seeking to amend the D.C. Code to provide that only marriage between a man and a woman would be recognized in D.C. Last year, D.C. City Council passed a law recognizing same-sex marriages validly performed elsewhere. (See prior posting.) The court held that Council appropriately implemented the Charter Amendment Act when it prohibited initiatives that would authorize discrimination in violation of the D.C. Human Rights Act. The proposed initiative would violate the Human Rights Act by authorizing discrimination based on sexual orientation. (See prior related posting.) Alliance Defense Fund (which filed the lawsuit on behalf of a local pastor and other voters) in a release yesterday says it will appeal the decision.

Pro-Marriage Equality Protesters Fined One Cent For Trespassing

The Louisville (KY) Courier-Journal reported last week on the trial of a same-sex couple-- Dominique James and the Rev. Maurice “Bojangles” Blanchard-- for criminal trespass after they refused to leave the Jefferson County Clerk of Court's office at its closing time in protest of being denied a marriage license. The couple insisted that they were "spiritually obligated" to stay.  The jury last Tuesday convicted the defendants, but imposed a fine of only one cent. The maximum fine could have been $250. Blanchard called the verdict a vindication of their protest. The couple had rejected a plea agreement under which charges would have been dismissed in exchange for their each working 5 hours at a charity of their choice. [Thanks to Tom Rutledge for the lead.]

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Jeffrey A. Redding, Marriage ≠ Marriage: Querying the Relevance of Equality to the Interstate Recognition of Same-Sex Relationships, (University of Miami Law Review, Forthcoming).
• D. Brian Dennison, Faith Frieda Letacie & Heather M. Pate, Confronting Child Sacrifice in Uganda: A Multi-Layered View, (Kabarak University Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Kevin J. Murphy, Administering the Ministerial Exception Post-Hosanna-Tabor: Why Contract Claims Should Not Be Barred, (Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics and Public Policy, Vol. 28, No. 1, 2014).
• Brian D. Galle, How Do Nonprofit Firms Respond to Tax Policy?, (May 29, 2014).

From SmartCILP:

• Elizabeth A. Clark, Liberalism In Decline: Legislative Trends Limiting Religious Freedom In Russia and Central Asia, 22 Transnational Law & Contemporary Problems 297-342 (2013).

Advocacy Groups Have Varied Reactions To Tuesday's Election Results

The reactions to Tuesday's election results from advocacy groups have, not surprisingly, run the gamut. Americans United yesterday issued an election analysis titled "The Religious Right and Election 2008: Down But Not Out." It warned:

After eight years of unprecedented access to the White House and (until 2006) in the halls of Congress, Religious Right organizations are about to lose a lot of clout with much of official Washington and could see their influence at the national level diminished. But it’s unlikely any of these organizations will close down. Rather, they will organize to defeat individual-freedom initiatives put forward by President Barack Obama, and they will place more emphasis on state and local governments as a way to press their agenda forward.

Yesterday's Christian Post reported that Christian groups had varied reactions to Obama's win. The National Council of Churches USA issued a statement congratulating Obama and promising to work with him "to respond to the realities that a loving God places before us each day." Looking in a different direction, Focus on the Family took heart in the fact that Democrats failed to win the veto-proof 60 seats in the Senate. They were also encouraged by the passage of anti-gay marriage amendments in three states. The group said that these results "give values voters reason to stay tuned to development on Capitol Hill."

Yesterday's New York Times reports similarly that the approval of the bans on gay marriage, along with passage in Arkansas of a provision intended to bar gays and lesbians from adopting children, were "a stunning victory for religious conservatives, who had little else to celebrate on an Election Day." It points out that California will still be able to offer civil unions to same-sex couples.

Ministerial Exception In Hostile Work Environment Cases

In Demkovich v. St. Andrew the Apostle Parish, Calumet City, (ND IL, Sept. 30, 2018), an Illinois federal district court set out an extensive analysis of when the ministerial exception doctrine bars claims for a hostile work environment, as opposed to claims involving firing or refusal to hire, under Title VII and the ADA.  In the case, a parish music director claimed damages because of abusive and harassing behavior growing out of his engagement and marriage to a same-sex partner.  The court said in part:

[W]hen a minister brings a claim that does not challenge a tangible employment action, then whether the First Amendment bars the claim depends on a case-by-case analysis on the nature of the claim, the extent of the intrusion on religious doctrine, and the extent of the entanglement with church governance required by the particular litigation. If the nature of the claim would require that a court take stance on a disputed religious doctrine, then that weighs in favor of First Amendment protection for the church....

If, on the other hand, no religious justification is offered at all (for a nontangible employment action), then there would be little or no risk of violating the Free Exercise Clause....

... [L]itigation over Reverend Dada’s alleged harassment based on Demkovich’s sex, sexual orientation, and marital status would excessively entangle the government in religion. To start, the Archdiocese offers a religious justification for the alleged derogatory remarks and other harassment....

... [H]arassing statements and conduct are motivated by an official Church position (or at least the Archdiocese would defend the case on those grounds). Of course, regulating how the official opposition is expressed is not as directly intrusive as outright punishing the Church for holding that position (which a federal court cannot do). But it comes close, and must weigh in favor of barring the claim under the Religion Clauses. 

ACLU Sues Kentucky Clerk Who Is Refusing To Issue Marriage Licenses

Yesterday the Kentucky ACLU filed a federal class-action lawsuit against Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis who is refusing to issue marriage licences to anyone because of her religious objections to issuing them to same-sex couples. (ACLU press release). The complaint (full text) in Miller v. Davis, (ED KY, filed 7/2/2015) alleges that Davis' refusal "constitutes a substantial, direct and continuous infringement upon Plaintiffs’ fundamental right to marry," as well as amounting to a violation of the Establishment Clause. AP reports on the lawsuit.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Nathan B. Oman, How to Judge Shari'a Contracts: A Guide to Islamic Marriage Agreements in American Courts, (Utah Law Review, Vol. 2011, No. 1, p. 287, 2011).
• Douglas NeJaime, Marriage Inequality: Religious Exemptions and the Production of Sexual Orientation Discrimination, (California Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Kishor Kunal, Freedom of Religion in Secular State, (December 6, 2011).
• Munir Ahmad Mughal, English Translation of Ibn Hashsham's Siratun-Nabi (Peace Be Upon Him), (December 11, 2011).
• Steven Aiello, 'Islam and Social Justice in Iran': The Merging of Economic, Political and Religious Dogmas in the Iranian Revolution, (December 6, 2011).
• Jeffrey A. Parness, Statutory Parenthood for Same-Sex Partners, (Illinois Bar Journal, Vol. 99, p. 636, December 2011).
• Mohammed Khnifer, Goldman Sachs Claims that its $2 billion Sukuk Programme Follows a Murabaha Structure, Mohammed Khnifer Claims Otherwise – That it's Nothing More than Areverse Tawarruq,(December 6, 2011).

Britain's Court of Appeal Rejects Christian Agency's Ban On Same-Sex Couples Becoming Foster Parents

In The Queen (On the Application of Cornerstone (Northeast) Adoption and Fostering Services, Ltd. v. Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Education, Children's Services and Skills (OFSTED), (EWCA, Sept. 24, 2021), England's Court of Appeal held that Cornerstone, a Christian foster care agency, violated the Equality Act 2010 and the Human Rights Act 1998 when it required clients with which it placed children to:

Set a high standard in personal morality which recognises that God's gift of sexual intercourse is to be enjoyed exclusively within Christian marriage; abstain from all sexual sins including immodesty, the viewing of pornography, fornication, adultery, cohabitation, homosexual behaviour and wilful violation of your birth sex.

The court said in part:

The detrimental impact on society and on individuals of discrimination on the ground of sexual orientation has led the law to set a demanding standard of justification.... [W]e should be slow to accept that prohibiting fostering agencies from discriminating against homosexuals is a disproportionate limitation on their right to manifest their religion....

... [T]here can be no doubting the value of its work or the sincerity of [Cornerstone's] motives. However, in order to justify a policy of this nature, it needed to provide credible evidence that there would otherwise be a seriously detrimental impact on carers and children. The evidence it actually advanced did not go beyond the level of general assertion.... [W]hile I would not rule out the possibility of an organisation in this position putting up a substantial evidence-based case on justification, Cornerstone simply did not do that....

[Thanks to Law & Religion UK for the lead.]

Ballot Measures In 6 States Watched By Religious Groups

At least six states on Tuesday have ballot measures that are being watched by religious groups. Here they are, along with links to the official ballot language for each proposal:

• Florida- Proposal 2- Marriage Protection Amendment.
• California- Proposition 8- Initiative to Eliminate Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry.
• Arizona- Proposition 102- Constitutional Amendment Relating to Marriage.
• Michigan- Proposal 08-12- Proposed Constitutional Amendment on Human Embryo and Embryonic Stem Cell Research.
• South Dakota- Initiated Measure 11- To Prohibit Abortions Except in Cases Where the Mother's Life or Health Is At a Substantial and Irreversible Risk, and In Cases of Reported Rape and Incest.
• Colorado- Amendment 48- Definition of Person.

Saturday's American Chronicle has a report on ballot measures around the country.

California Brings Back "Bride" and "Groom" On Marriage Licenses

As previously reported, some in California are objecting to the current form of California's marriage licenses. In order to take account of now-recognized same-sex marriages, the forms merely identify the parties to be married as Party A and Party B. In response, the California Department of Public Health last week announced a change. Effective November 17, new forms will be used. They will call for information about the "First Person" and "Second Person" applying for the license. In addition, optional boxes will be available that can be checked to identify the applicants as "Bride" and "Groom". Yesterday, the AP reported on the change. [Thanks to Alliance Alert for the lead.]

6th Circuit Dismisses County Clerk's Suit As Moot

In Miller v. Davis, (6th Cir., April 19, 2016), the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed as moot the appeal by Rowan County, Kentucky, Clerk Kim Davis seeking a preliminary injunction against a requirement that she issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples in violation of her religious beliefs.  The court said:

On December 22, 2015, the newly-elected Governor of Kentucky issued an executive order revising Kentucky's marriage license form to eliminate the need for the name and signature of the county clerk. Davis's counsel issued a press release stating that the revised form will permit Davis and the other county clerks "to do their jobs without compromising religious values and beliefs."

The Louisville Courier-Journal reports on the decision.

Democratic 2012 Platform: Provisions on Faith In America, Civil Rights, and Social Issues

As reported by Raw Story, the Democratic Party released it 2012 Platform (full text) on Monday night. It includes a number of provisions on the role of faith in America and on issues that have been of particular concern to religious groups.  The Platform section titled "Strengthening the American Community" includes the following:

Faith has always been a central part of the American story, and it has been a driving force of progress and justice throughout our history. We know that our nation, our communities, and our lives are made vastly stronger and richer by faith and the countless acts of justice and mercy it inspires. Faith- based organizations will always be critical allies in meeting the challenges that face our nation and our world – from domestic and global poverty, to climate change and human trafficking. People of faith and religious organizations do amazing work in communities across this country and the world, and we believe in lifting up and valuing that good work, and finding ways to support it where possible. We believe in constitutionally sound, evidence-based partnerships with faith-based and other non-profit organizations to serve those in need and advance our shared interests. There is no conflict between supporting faith-based institutions and respecting our Constitution, and a full commitment to both principles is essential for the continued flourishing of both faith and country.

The Platform supports "comprehensive immigration reform that supports our economic goals and reflects our values as both a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants;" "policies that truly value families," and "a woman’s right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay." It also provides:

We support marriage equality and support the movement to secure equal treatment under law for same-sex couples. We also support the freedom of churches and religious entities to decide how to administer marriage as a religious sacrament without government interference.

The Platform Section on Civil Rights says in part:

At the core of the Democratic Party is the principle that no one should face discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, language, religion, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability status. Democrats support our civil rights statutes and we have stepped up enforcement of laws that prohibit discrimination in the workplace and other settings. We are committed to protecting all communities from violence. We are committed to ending racial, ethnic, and religious profiling and requiring federal, state, and local enforcement agencies to take steps to eliminate the practice....

 ...we must continue our work to prevent vicious bullying of young people and support LGBT youth... The Administration has said that the word 'family' in immigration includes LGBT relationships in order to protect bi-national families threatened with deportation.

 The Platform also contains sections on "Combating Human Trafficking" and on "Gay Rights As Human Rights."

Recent Law Review Review Articles

From SSRN:

• Marie Ashe, Privacy and Prurience: An Essay on American Law, Religion, and Women, (American Journal of Legal History, Vol. 51, p. 461, 2011).
• Katherine Spencer, Mahr as Contract: Internal Pluralism and External Perspectives, (Oñati Socio-Legal Series, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2011).
• Paul Horwitz, Act III of the Ministerial Exception, (Northwestern University Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Richard W. Painter, The Moral Responsibilities of Investment Bankers, (University of St. Thomas Law Journal, Vol. 8, No. 1, 2010).
• Samuel T. Grover, Religious Conscience Exemptions to the PPACA Health Insurance Mandate, (American Journal of Law and Medicine, Vol. 37, No. 4, 2011).
• Leslie C. Griffin, Ordained Discrimination: The Cases Against the Ministerial Exception, (U of Houston Law Center No. 2011-A-9, Sept. 30, 2011).
• Susan E. Hauser, More Than Abstract Justice: The Defense of Marriage Act and the Equal Treatment of Same-Sex Married Couples Under Section 302(A) of the Bankruptcy Code, (American Bankruptcy Law Journal, Forthcoming).
• Anita Bernstein, Toward More Parsimony and Transparency in 'The Essentials of Marriage', (Michigan State Law Review, Vol. 81, 2011).
• Caroline Mala Corbin, The Irony of Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & School v. EEOC, (Northwestern University Law Review Colloquy, Forthcoming).

SmartCILP:

• John Garvey, Intellect and Virtue: The Idea of a Catholic University, 60 Catholic University Law Review 563-573 (2011).
• Samuel J. Levine, Second Annual Holocaust Remembrance Lecture at Washington University. Jewish Law From Out of the Depths: Tragic Choices in the Holocaust, 10 Washington University Global Studies Law Review 133-142 (2011).