HHS To Allow Grantees To Refuse To Serve LGBT Clients

On Nov. 1, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services announced actions that effectively allow agencies receiving HHS grants, including foster care and adoption agencies, to refuse to serve gay, lesbian and transgender individuals and families on religious grounds. First, HHS issued a Notice of Non-Enforcement of  rules adopted in 2016 that prohibit such discrimination. The non-enforcement decision was based on "significant concerns about compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act" in the promulgation of the 2016 rules.  HHS then issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would repromulgate the rules with narrower anti-discrimination protections. The proposed new rules would replace this section:

(c) It is a public policy requirement of HHS that no person otherwise eligible will be excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or subjected to discrimination in the administration of HHS programs and services based on non-merit factors such as age, disability, sex, race, color, national origin, religion, gender identity, or sexual orientation. Recipients must comply with this public policy requirement in the administration of programs supported by HHS awards.

(d) In accordance with the Supreme Court decisions in United States v. Windsor and in Obergefell v. Hodges, all recipients must treat as valid the marriages of same-sex couples. This does not apply to registered domestic partnerships, civil unions or similar formal relationships recognized under state law as something other than a marriage.

The new rules will instead provide:

(c) It is a public policy requirement of HHS that no person otherwise eligible will be excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or subjected to discrimination in the administration of HHS programs and services, to the extent doing so is prohibited by federal statute.

(d) HHS will follow all applicable Supreme Court decisions in administering its award programs.

In its announcement, HHS said in part:

The proposed rule would better align its grants regulations with federal statutes, eliminating regulatory burden, including burden on the free exercise of religion.

New York Times reports on the HHS action.

Recent Articles and Book of Interest

From SSRN:

• Haider Ala Hamoudi, Religious Minorities and Shari’a in Iraqi Courts, (Boston University International Law Journal, 2013, Forthcoming).
• Mark Anthony Frassetto, Catholic Emancipation: 1760-1829, (January 9, 2013).
• Donn Short, Queering Schools, GSAs and the Law: Taking on God, (Gerald Walton, ed, The Gay Agenda: Claiming Space, Identity & Justice, New York: Peter Lang, 2013).
• Wayne Barnes, Render Unto Rawls: Law, Gospel, and the Evangelical Fallacy, (January 11, 2013).
• Adilson Jose Moreira, We are Family! Legal Recognition of Same-Sex Unions in Brazil, (American Journal of Comparative Law, Vol. 60, No. 4, 2012).
• Joseph Benjamin Landau, DOMA and Presidential Discretion: Interpreting and Enforcing Federal Law, (Fordham Law Review, Vol. 81, 2012).
• Joseph Benjamin Landau, Symposium Foreword to Defense of Marriage Act: Law, Policy, and the Future of Marriage, (Fordham Law Review, Vol. 81, p. 537, 2012).
• Shafi'i Abdul Azeez Bello, Application of 'Urf in Islamic Law, (January 11, 2013).

From SmartCILP and elsewhere:

• Stewart L. Harris, Which Bible? Which God?, (12 Appalachian Journal of Law 151-166, 2012).
• Faisal Kutty, Free Expression and an Elusive Middle Ground: Part Two, (JURIST - Forum, Jan. 7, 2012).

Recent Book:

• Andrew Koppelman, Defending American Religious Neutrality, (Harvard Univ. Press, Jan. 2013), reviewed by Daily Northwestern.

Suit By Web Designer Challenges LGBT Anti-Discrimination Law

Last week, Lorie Smith, the owner of a Colorado graphic and web design company, filed suit in federal district court challenging the constitutionality of Colorado's public accommodation anti-discrimination law.  The complaint (full text) in 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, (D CO, filed 9/20/2016) alleges that the anti-discrimination provisions as they apply to plaintiffs violate various provisions of the 1st and 14th Amendments, including the free exercise clause.  The complaint alleges:

7. Colorado law makes it unlawful for Lorie and 303 Creative to publish, display, or mail any communication stating that they will not design, create, or publish websites celebrating same-sex marriages. See Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34-601(2)(a).

8. Colorado law also makes it unlawful for Lorie and 303 Creative to publish, display, or mail any communication indicating that a person’s patronage at 303 Creative is “unwelcome, objectionable, unacceptable, or undesirable” because of sexual orientation. See Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34-601(2)(a).

9. Therefore, Lorie and 303 Creative cannot explain on 303 Creative’s website their religious belief that God designed marriage as an institution between one man and one woman and why they cannot create wedding websites promoting and celebrating any other conception of marriage.

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

6th Circuit Denies Kim Davis Stay of Injunction Pending Appeal

Yesterday in Miller v. Davis, (6th Cir., Sept. 17, 2015), the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals denied a motion by Rowan County, Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis to stay the preliminary injunction against her, pending appeal. The district court had enjoined Davis from refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.  The appeals court said that Davis had not sought a stay from the district court, as required by Federal Rules, before asking the Court of Appeals for a stay.  Davis argued that it would have been useless to go to the district court first.

UPDATE: Marty Lederman at Balkinization blog (9/19) has a lengthy discussion of whether Kim Davis or her office is in violation of the federal district court's injunction in the implementation of the issuance by a deputy clerk of marriage licences with modified language.

Recent Articles and Book of Interest

From SSRN:

• Cornelia Koch, The Sky is Falling If Judges Decide Religious Controversies! - Or is it? The German Experience of Religious Freedom under a Bill of Rights, (P. Babie and N. Rochow (eds), Freedom of Religion under the Bill of Rights', University of Adelaide Press, Adelaide 190-215, 2012).
• Paul T. Babie and Neville Grant Rochow, SC, Protecting Religious Freedom under Bills of Rights: Australia as Microcosm, (P. Babie and N. Rochow (eds), Freedom of Religion under the Bill of Rights', University of Adelaide Press, Adelaide 190-215, 2012).
• Ngaire Naffine, How Religion Constrains Law and the Idea of Choice, (P. Babie and N. Rochow (eds), Freedom of Religion under the Bill of Rights', University of Adelaide Press, Adelaide 190-215, 2012).
• Jonathan C. Augustine, Environmental Justice and Eschatology in Revelation, (Loyola Law Review, New Orleans, Vol. 58, No. 2, 2012, Forthcoming).
• Bruce MacDougall, Elsje Bonthuys, Kenneth Norrie, and Marjolein Van den Brink, Conscientious Objection to Creating Same-Sex Unions: An International Analysis, (Canadian Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 127-164, 2012).
• Patrick McKinley Brennan, The Mighty Work of Making Nations Happy: A Response to James Davison Hunter, (Pepperdine Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Carl H. Esbeck, Defining Religion Down: Hosanna-Tabor, Martinez, and the U.S. Supreme Court, (First Amendment Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Terri Day and Leticia M Diaz, The Affordable Care Act and Religious Freedom: The Next Battleground, Georgetown Journal of Law & Public Policy, Vol. 11, No. 1, 2012.
• Rachel Gillum and David C. Wilson, American Muslims or Muslim Americans?: Impact of Perceived Discrimination on Confidence in Security Institutions, (August 27, 2012).
• Bradley T. Borden and Katherine E. David, Sales of Church Real Property to Parishioners, (24 Tax’N Exempts 3, July/Aug. 2012).

From SmartCILP:

• Jack B. Harrison, The Strange Intersection Between Law, Religion, and Government in the Regulation of Marriage, 6 Charleston Law Review 547-568 (2012).
• Kim Benita Vera, From Papal Bull to Racial Rule: Indians of the Americas, Race, and the Foundations of International Law, [Abstract], 42 California Western International Law Journal 453-472 (2012).

Recent Book:

• Shimon Gershon Rosenberg, Zot Briti (This Is My Covenant: Conversion, Secularization, Civil Marriage ), edited by Amnon S. Dukov, Zohar Maor, Moshe S. Faloch, The Institute for the Advancement of Rabbi Shagar's Writings, 258 pages (in Hebrew ). Reviewed in Haaretz.

Top 10 Religious Liberty and Church State Developments of 2019

Each year in December, I attempt to pick the most important church-state and religious liberty developments of the past year-- including developments internationally in the mix.  My choices are based on the importance of the pick to law or policy, regardless of whether the development has garnered significant media attention. This year has been a particularly active one, and 2020 promises to be even more eventful.  The selection of top stories obviously involves a good deal of subjective judgment, and I welcome e-mail comment from those who disagree with my choices.  So here are my Top Ten picks as another year comes to an end:

1. The ongoing battle over abortion rights, including the Supreme Court's action on Indiana's abortion law in Box v. Planned Parenthood, and Justice Thomas opinion focusing on abortion as eugenics; Supreme Court's granting of certiorari on Louisiana's abortion law; increasingly restrictive enactments by various states; and challenges to new HHS health care conscience rules.
   
2. Supreme Court's decision in American Legion v. American Humanist Society clarifying when religious-themed monuments on public property may remain.
   
3. Controversies over transgender rights, including Supreme Court's grant of review in cases on Title VII protections for LGBT employees, and DOD's amended policy on transgender service in the military.
   
4. Growth of anti-Semitism and governmental efforts to combat it, including controversial interpretation of Title VI.
   
5. Litigation and rule-making over whether adoption and foster care agencies receiving government funding can refuse to place children with same-sex couples.
   
6. Elimination of religious exemptions to vaccination requirements in wake of measles outbreaks, especially in New York.
   
7.  Supreme Court weighs in on inmates' access to chaplains during execution.
   
8. Extensions of statutes of limitations lead to flood of clergy abuse cases.
   
9. 7th Circuit upholds tax code's parsonage allowance.
   
10. India's courts and Parliament make major rulings that infringe on religious autonomy: Hindu Marriage Act covers transgender marriage; Parliament outlaws triple talaq; court bans animal sacrifice; power of ecclesiastical courts reduced; disputed holy site awarded to Hindus.

For other opinions on 2019's top stories, see the lists from Don Byrd at BJC, and from from the Religion News Association.

Teacher Reinstated After Anti-Gay Marriage Facebook Posting Now Charged With Improper Religious Statements

In Lake County, Florida on Wednesday, school Superintendent Susan Moxley ruled that Mount Dora High School social studies teacher Jerry Buell did not violate the district's code of ethics when he he posted an anti-gay marriage message on his personal Facebook page. The posting said that same-sex unions are a "cesspool" that make him want to throw up. WFTV News reports that the former Teacher of the Year was reinstated when school officials concluded that his posting did not "disrupt the orderly processes of the district." Yesterday, however, the Orlando Sentinel reported that officials have placed a "written directive" in Buell's personnel file because of religious postings on his school webpage and in his class syllabus.  On the webpage, Buell wrote that he tries to "teach and lead my students as if Lake Co. Schools had hired Jesus Christ himself."  On his syllabus, he tells students: "I teach God's truth, I make very few compromises. If you believe you may have a problem with that, get your schedule changed, 'cause I ain't changing!" The webpage has been removed and Buell has been instructed to delete some parts of his syllabus.

Meanwhile, at a rally yesterday, Liberty Counsel featured Buell "along with others who have received similar persecution for their Christian beliefs."

Seminarian Wins Preliminary Injunction Permitting Picketing of Wal-Mart

Yesterday's Shreveport Times reported that on Monday a Louisiana federal district court granted a preliminary injunction barring the enforcement of three Natchitoches, LA ordinances against Edwin Crayton, a Christian seminary student who opposes gay marriage on religious grounds. Crayton wished to picket a Wal-Mart store in Natchitoches, believing that Wal-Mart supports gay marriage rights. However he was told that he needed a permit from the mayor and police chief in order to protest on a public sidewalk in front of the store. His lawsuit alleges (full text of complaint) that the city's permit ordinances are unconstitutional because they grant excessive discretion to the mayor and police chief, they are not narrowly tailored to further a legitimate governmental interest, and, in any event, he did not engage in a public gathering or open-air meeting-- the activities covered by the ordinances. The case is Crayton v. City of Natchitoches, Civ. Action No. 06-1946-A (WD LA, Nov. 13, 2006).

Today's 365 Gay reports that other Christian groups have also criticized Wal-Mart's LGBT diversity program, including its definition of an employee's "immediate family" to include a same-sex partner.

More On The Marriage Protection Amendment Debate

As the Senate today debates the Marriage Protection Amendment (see prior posting), with a vote possible tomorrow, proponents warn that without it religious organizations may end up being forced to provide benefits to same-sex couples even if doing so violates the organizations' religious beliefs. Others say that this fear is exaggerated. (Chicago Tribune story.) Meanwhile some others note that the date set for a Senate vote, June 6, 2006, has the ominous abbreviation "6 6 06". (The Conservative Voice.)

Utah Enacts LGBT Anti-Discrimination Law With Extensive Religious Exemptions

As reported by JDSupra, on March 12, Utah Governor Gary Herbert signed S.B. 296,  Antidiscrimination and Religious Freedom Amendments to Utah's laws banning disrimination in employment and housing.  The bill reflected a compromise backed by the Mormon Church, as well as by supporters of LGBT rights, to ban discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity while giving broad religious exemptions from the anti-discrimination requirements. (See prior posting.)  Here is the full text of the religious exemptions:

  34A-5-102. Definitions -- Unincorporated entities
(i)(ii) "Employer" does not include:
(A) a religious organization, a religious corporation sole, a religious association, a religious society, a religious educational institution, or a religious leader, when that individual is acting in the capacity of a religious leader;
(B) any corporation or association constituting an affiliate, a wholly owned
subsidiary, or an agency of any religious organization, religious corporation sole, religious association, or religious society; or
(C) the Boy Scouts of America or its councils, chapters, or subsidiaries...

   34A-5-111. Application to the freedom of expressive association and the free exercise of religion.
       This chapter may not be interpreted to infringe upon the freedom of expressive association or the free exercise of religion protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and Article I, Sections 1, 4, and 15 of the Utah Constitution....

    34A-5-112. Religious liberty protections -- Expressing beliefs and commitments in workplace -- Prohibition on employment actions against certain employee speech.

(1) An employee may express the employee's religious or moral beliefs and commitments in the workplace in a reasonable, non-disruptive, and non-harassing way on equal terms with similar types of expression of beliefs or commitments allowed by the  employer in the workplace, unless the expression is in direct conflict with the essential business-related interests of the employer.

(2) An employer may not discharge, demote, terminate, or refuse to hire any person, or  retaliate against, harass, or discriminate in matters of compensation or in terms, privileges, and conditions of employment against any person otherwise qualified, for lawful expression or  expressive activity outside of the workplace regarding the person's religious, political, or personal convictions, including convictions about marriage, family, or sexuality, unless the expression or expressive activity is in direct conflict with the essential business-related interests of the employer....

  57-21-3. Exemptions -- Sale by private individuals -- Nonprofit organizations --Noncommercial transactions....

(2) This chapter does not apply to a dwelling or a temporary or permanent residence  facility if:
(a) the discrimination is by sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or familial status for reasons of personal modesty or privacy, or in the furtherance of a religious institution's free exercise of religious rights under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution or the Utah Constitution; and
(b) the dwelling or the temporary or permanent residence facility is:
(i) operated by a nonprofit or charitable organization;
(ii) owned by, operated by, or under contract with a religious organization, a religious association, a religious educational institution, or a religious society;
(iii) owned by, operated by, or under contract with an affiliate of an entity described in Subsection (2)(b)(ii); or
(iv) owned by or operated by a person under contract with an entity described in
Subsection (2)(b)(ii).

... (4) (a) (i) Unless membership in a religion is restricted by race, color, sex, or national origin, this chapter does not prohibit an entity described in Subsection (4)(a)(ii) from:
(A) limiting the sale, rental, or occupancy of a dwelling or temporary or permanent residence facility the entity owns or operates for primarily noncommercial purposes to persons of the same religion; or
(B) giving preference to persons of the same religion when selling, renting, or selecting occupants for a dwelling, or a temporary or permanent residence facility, the entity owns or operates for primarily noncommercial purposes.

       (ii) The following entities are entitled to the exemptions described in Subsection (4)(a)(i):
(A) a religious organization, association, or society; or
(B) a nonprofit institution or organization operated, supervised, or controlled by or in conjunction with a religious organization, association, or society.

... (7) This chapter does not prohibit a nonprofit educational institution from:
(a) requiring its single students to live in a dwelling, or a temporary or permanent residence facility, that is owned by, operated by, or under contract with the nonprofit educational institution;
(b) segregating a dwelling, or a temporary or permanent residence facility, that is owned by, operated by, or under contract with the nonprofit educational institution on the basis of sex or familial status or both:
 (i) for reasons of personal modesty or privacy; or
 (ii) in the furtherance of a religious institution's free exercise of religious rights under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution or the Utah Constitution....

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Muthoifin Muthoifin & Dimas Adi Saputra, Early Marriage in Islam and its Implementation in Indonesia, (May 27, 2024).
• David E. Guinn, Negotiating Peace in Ethno-Religious Infused Conflict: Applying Religiously Informed Socio-Secular Analysis to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, (May 16, 2024).
• Robert W. Gomulkiewicz, Separated by a Door Not a Wall: Replacing a Powerful Establishment Clause Metaphor, (University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law, Forthcoming vol. 27 (2025)).
• Clark B. Lombardi, Reynolds Revisited: The Original Meaning of Reynolds v. United States and Free Exercise after Fulton, 75 Ala. L. Rev. 1009 (2024).
• Christopher C. Lund, Church Autonomy in the United States, (in Freedom of Religion and Religious Pluralism (Md Jahid Hossain Bhuiyan & Carla M. Zoethout, eds., Brill, 2023).
• Michael Lewyn, Intentional Discrimination and Haredi Jews, (51 Real Estate L.J. 25 (2022)).
• Holning Lau, Decriminalizing Same-Sex Sexual Activity: Jurisprudence from the Global South, (International Journal of Constitutional Law, Vol. 22 (2024 forthcoming)).
• An Qi Tan, The Impact of Charitable Giving on Financial Wellbeing: Aligning Values with Financial Security (May 28, 2024).
• S. Ernie Walton & Eric A. DeGroff, Brief as Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioners in John and Jane Parents 1 v. Montgomery County Bd. of Educ., (January 24, 2024).

From SSRN (Islamic Law):

• Fatima Idrees, Concept of Mal and Ownership: Comparison in Positive Law and Shariah Law (April 25, 2024).
• Fatima Idrees, Islamic Perspective: Terrorism and Human Rights (April 25, 2024).
• Fatima Idrees, A Comparative Analysis of the Responsibility and Limitations of an Agent in Contract Act, 1872 and Islamic Law of Contract, (April 25, 2024).
• Fatima Idrees, Charter of Madina: The First Constitutional Document, (April 25, 2024).
• Zainuddin Zainuddin, Islamic Economic Law Perspectives of Profit-Sharing Systems (Teseng) in the Cultivation of Rice Fields in Bugis-Makassar Community, South Sulawesi, Indonesia, (April 24, 2024).
• Murtala, Wazeer, Beyond Religious Divide: How the Muslim Community in Romania are Helping Refugees from Ukraine, (April 29, 2023).

From SmartCILP and elsewhere:

• Ahmed Al Rawi, Blocking Faith: How American Muslims Are Chilled through the New Anti-Muslim Statutes and the Security Agencies' Surveillance in the Era of Digital Policing, 39 Touro Law Review 1-42 (2023).
• Journal of Law and Religion, Vol. 39, Issue 1 (Jan 2024). (Open access until 6/30/2024).

Britain's Court of Appeals Rules Against Gay Priest's Employment Discrimination Claim

In Pemberton v Inwood, (EWCA , March 22, 2018), the England and Wales Court of Appeal ruled against Jeremy Pemberton, a gay Church of England priest who was prevented from taking a position as a hospital chaplain when he married his same-sex partner.  Pemberton sued claiming employment discrimination and harassment. Lady Justice Asplin's opinion held that the action taken against Pemberton falls within a statutory exception from the Equality Act's discrimination provisions for religious organizations that impose various requirements regarding marriage and sexual orientation.  Rejecting Pemberton's harassment claim, Justice Asplin said in part:

If you belong to an institution with known, and lawful, rules, it implies no violation of dignity, and is not cause for reasonable offence, that those rules should be applied to you, however wrong you may believe them to be. Not all opposition of interests is hostile or offensive.

 The Guardian reports on the court's decision. (See prior related posting.)

Roy Moore's Trial On Ethics Charges Set For Next Month

After a hearing yesterday on charges against Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore, the Alabama Court of the Judiciary issued an Order (full text) denying motions for summary judgment from both sides.  Yesterday's order also set the case for trial on Sept. 28. At issue are charges filed by the Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission contending that Moore acted unethically when in January he issued an administrative order telling state probate judges that they had a duty under Alabama law to continue to refuse to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. (See prior posting.) Al.com reports on yesterday's developments.

FBI Says Mennonites In Nicaragua Aiding Mother To Avoid Custody Change To Former Lesbian Partner

AP today reports on the international kidnapping investigation by the FBI that is looking for Lisa Miller and her daughter who fled the country after her former same-sex partner, Janet Jenkins, was awarded custody of of the girl.  In 2003, Miller broke up with Jenkins, renounced homosexuality and became a Baptist, and then a Mennonite.  Miller, the birth mother, was originally granted custody, but after she refused to comply with visitation schedules for Jenkins, courts in both Virginia and Vermont granted custody to Jenkins. But Miller had already fled to Central America.  In April, the FBI arrested a Nicaraguan missionary, Timo Miller, and charged him with abetting an international kidnapping by arranging a flight for Lisa Miller and her daughter from Canada to Nicaragua. More than $30,000 has been raised for a Timo Miller defense fund.  Apparently the Mennonite community in Nicaragua is helping hide Lisa Miller and her daughter.  At one point, it appears she stayed at a beach house in Nicaragua owned by the father of an administrative assistant at Jerry Falwell's Liberty University Law School. Liberty Counsel represented Miller in her Vermont court proceedings.  Pablo Yoder, a Mennonite pastor in Nicaragua, said:

[T]he Nicaraguan Brotherhood felt it right and good to help Lisa not only free herself from the so called civil marriage and lesbian lifestyle, but especially to protect her nine year old daughter from being abducted and handed over to an active lesbian and a whole-hearted activist.

Another Court Says DOMA Is Unconstitutional

Another court has held that the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional.  In Windsor v. United States, (SD NY,June 6, 2012), a New York federal district court awarded plaintiff Edith Windsor damages equal to the $353,000 in estate taxes paid to the federal government on her same-sex spouse's estate. Edith and her long-time partner Thea Spyer, who were New York residents, were married legally in Canada in 2007. Spyer by will left her estate for the benefit of Windsor, but because of DOMA Spyer did not qualify for the unlimited estate tax marital deduction. Without invoking strict scrutiny, the court held that Section 3 of DOMA violates the equal protection component of the 5th Amendment because the government's asserted interests are inadequate to support the law. Jurist reports that this is the fourth federal court decision invalidating DOMA. (See prior related posting.)

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Rafael Domingo, Toward the Spiritualization of Politics, (April 9, 2020).
• Beatrice Jessie Hill, The Deliberative Privacy Principle: Abortion, Free Speech, and Religious Freedom, (William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal, Vol. 28, 2019).
• Jason A. Cade, 'Water is Life!' (and Speech!): Death, Dissent and Democracy in the Borderlands, (Indiana Law Journal, Vol. 96 (Forthcoming)).
• Engy Abdelkader, China's Repression of Uigher Muslims: A Human Rights Perspective in Historical Context, (UCLA Law Journal of Islamic & Near Eastern Law (2020).
• Joseph Davis & Nicholas Reaves, Fruit of the Poisonous Lemon Tree: How the Supreme Court Created Offended-Observer Standing, and Why It's Time for it to Go, (Notre Dame Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Dimitry Kochenov & Uladzislau Belavusau, Same-Sex Spouses: More Free Movement, but What About Marriage? Coman: Case C-673/16, Coman et al. v. Inspectoratul General Pentru Imigrări, Judgement of the Court of Justice (Grand Chamber) of 5 June 2018, (Common Market Law Review 57(1), pp. 227–242, 2020).
• A.T. Mohd, A.M. Yunus & I. Hassan, Ideology, Communication, and Response to Terrorism: A Sharia-based Perspective, (International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 10(3), 124–130 (2020).

British Registrar's Religious Discrimination Suit Heard By Tribunal

Today's London Mail reports that in Britain, a London employment tribunal yesterday heard arguments in a religious discrimination case brought by civil marriage registrar Lillian Ladele. Ladele says that the Islington council violated her rights when it insisted that in order for her to keep her position she would be required to perform civil partnership ceremonies for same-sex couples. Ladele, a Christian, claims that as a matter of religious principle she cannot perform the ceremonies. She told the hearing examiner that she was picked on and bullied on a daily basis at work.

House Hearing Explores Lobbying of Supreme Court by Religious Conservatives

Yesterday, the House Judiciary Committee held a hearing titled Undue Influence: Operation Higher Court and Politicking at SCOTUS. One of the witnesses was Rev. Robert Schenck who, in his written testimony, expanded on his previously published interview with the New York Times.  Schenck recounts his organization's attempts to gain access to Supreme Court Justices through donors to the Supreme Court Historical Society. He said in part:

My purpose was to develop relationships with the Justices who held positions sympathetic to religious conservatives' general concerns. In this way, I could gain insights into their thinking regarding the questions and cases that come before them and, perhaps, read their disposition toward the topics of most significant interest to me and my cohorts. Over time, I also thought my associates and supporters might be able to shore up the resolve of the conservative members. Our concern was for cases we adjudged beneficial to the country's culture, such as those restricting or banning abortion, euthanasia and assisted suicide, as well as same-sex relationships, especially marriage, and those expanding religious liberty, predominantly Christian practice, and public displays of Christian belief. The Historical Society was also a place where my cohorts and I could learn more about the customs, traditions, mores, and protocols of the Court, easing our entry into their social circles.

His testimony went on to describe his learning in advance about the outcome of the Hobby Lobby case. 

Another witness before the Committee, Mark R. Paoletta, in his written testimony sharply criticized Schenck's account, saying that Schenck has "built his career on deception and deceit."  NPR reports on the hearing.

Trinity Western Grads Will Not Be Eligible For the Ontario Bar

The controversy over Canada's newest proposed law school-- Christian affiliated Trinity Western-- continues. At the center of the controversy is a provision in the school's "community covenant" that calls for abstention from "sexual intimacy that violates the sacredness of marriage between a man and a woman." The Toronto Star reports that after receiving approval earlier this month from the Law Society of British Columbia-- the school's home province-- yesterday the school suffered a defeat in the province of Ontario.  The Law Society of Upper Canada voted 28-21 against granting the school accreditation. This means that the school's graduates will not be permitted to apply for admission to the bar in Ontario.  A vote is expected today by the Nova Scotia Barristers' Society, and in June by the Law Society of New Brunswick.

UPDATE: On April 25, the Nova Scotia Barristers' Society voted 10-9 to only give provisional accreditation to Trinity Western law school. Its graduates will be allowed to enroll in the province's bar admission program only if the school drops its Community Covenant that bars same-sex intimacy.  If the Covenant is not dropped graduates will not be allowed to article in the province, but they can still practice in Nova Scotia according to the Prince George Citizen.

Suit Against Catholic Diocese By Fired Lesbian Food Bank Manager Alleges Fraud

Kansas City Star reported yesterday on a lawsuit filed by a Kansas City (MO) woman who says she was fired from her position as a pastoral associate managing a food bank for St. Francis Xavier Catholic parish after her same-sex marital relationship was mentioned in a newspaper article.  Plaintiff Colleen Simon says that priests at the parish knew of her marriage to Rev. Donna Simon, a Lutheran minister, and had no problem with it. However it is alleged that when the relationship was publicly mentioned in an article about an area of Kansas City, Bishop Robert Finn ordered her fired.  The state court lawsuit against the Diocese and Finn claims that the diocese fraudulently encouraged her to take the food bank position knowing that it had no intention of keeping its commitments to her.