British Registrar Wins Right To Refuse To Perform Civil Partnership Ceremonies

Times Online today reports on a decision by a British employment tribunal vindicating claims by civil marriage registrar Lillian Ladele who was "treated like a pariah" by fellow-emplyees after she refused on religious grounds to perform same-sex civil partnership ceremonies. The ruling said that Islington council wrongly "placed a greater value on the rights of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transsexual community than it placed on the rights of Ms Ladele as one holding an orthodox Christian belief." It found that Ladele's colleagues created "an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment" for Ladele. A further hearing on damages is scheduled for September. (See prior related posting.)

UPDATE: Here is the full text of the employment tribunal's decision in Ladele v. London Borough of Islingon. [Thanks to the Christian Institute for posting it and to the Anonymous comment to this post for the lead.]

UPDATE: The National Secular Society reported on July 18 that the Islington Council plans to appeal the employment tribunal ruling.

Recent Articles and Scholarship In Law and Religion

From SSRN:
Perry Dane, Exemptions for Religion Contained in Regulatory Statutes" . Encyclopedia of American Civil Liberties, Vol. 1, pp. 559-562 (2006).

Chaim Saiman, Legal Theology: The Turn to Conceptualism in Nineteenth-Century Jewish Law, Villanova Law/Public Policy Research Paper No. 2007-5.

From SmartCILP (mostly):
James Forman Jr., The Rise and Fall of School Vouchers: A Story of Religion, Race, and Politics (Abstract), 54 UCLA Law Review 547-604 (2007).

Kamran Hashemi, Religious Legal Traditions, Muslim States, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child: An Essay on the Relevant UN Documentation, 29 Human Rights Quarterly 194-227 (2007).

Thomas J. Paprocki, Marriage, Same-Sex Relationships, and the Catholic Church, 38 Loyola University Chicago Law Journal 247-264 (2007).

Theresa J. Pulley Radwan, Keeping the Faith: The Rights of Parishioners In Church Reorganizations, 82 Washington Law Review 75-120 (2007).

James A. Sonne, Firing Thoreau: Conscience and At-Will Employment, 9 University of Pennsylvania Journal of Labor & Employment Law 235-291 (2007).

Gerard V. Bradley, The Blaine Amendment: Harbinger of Secularism?, 8 Engage 138-143 (Feb. 2007).

Cert. Petition Filed In D.C.Refusal of Marriage Initiative

A petition for certiorari (full text) was filed in the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday seeking review of the D.C. Court of Appeals decision in Jackson v. District of Columbia Board of Elections and Ethics. In the case, D.C.'s highest appellate court, in a 5-4 decision, upheld election officials' refusal to accept a petition seeking an initiative vote to bar D.C. from recognizing same sex marriages. (See prior posting.) The petition asks the Supreme Court to decide whether the D.C. Council violated the Congressionally approved D.C. Charter in limiting the issues that can be put to an initiative vote. An Alliance Defense Fund press release announces the filing of the cert. petition.

Recent Articles, Book and Movie of Interest

From SSRN:

• Lina Triantafyllia Papadopoulou, Religious Jurisdictions and the Pluralisation of Legal Adjudication: The Emergence of Parallel Religious Jurisdictions in Greece, (August 28, 2014).
• M. Christian Green, From Social Hostility to Social Media: Religious Pluralism, Human Rights, and Democratic Reform in Africa, (African Human Rights Law Journal 14:1 (May 2014): 93-125).
• Mumtaz Ahmad Shah, Jammu and Kashmir: Understanding Identity and Difference, (December 21, 2014).
• Archana Mishra, Breaking Silence - Christian Women's Inheritance Rights Under Indian Succession Act, 1925, (December 25, 2014).
• Raphael Cohen-Almagor, Countering Hate on the Internet, (Annual Review of Law and Ethics, Vol. 22 (2014), pp. 431-443).
• Stephen G. Gilles, Does the Right to Elective Abortion Include the Right to Ensure the Death of the Fetus?, (January 2, 2015).
• Samuel William Bettwy, The Potential of Transnational Cinema to Counter Islamic Extremism, (CTX Journal, vol. 4, No. 4, November 2014).

From SmartCILP:

• Brett A. Geier, Texas Cheerleaders and the First Amendment: Can You Cheer for God At a Football Game?, 33 Mississippi College of Law Review 65-88 (2014).
• Rachel Wagley, The Quiet Audience: U.S. Responsibility To Call For an International Investigation Into Crimes Against Muslims in Burma, 28 Emory International Law Review 43-61 (2014).
• The Multicultural State and the Religiously Neutral State. Reply to Paul Cliteur by Phil Ryan [abstract]; rejoinder by Paul Cliteur [abstract]. 12 I.Con: Int'l J. Const. L. 457-467 (2014).

Recent book:

• Marc Solomon, Winning Marriage: The Inside Story of How Same-Sex Couples Took on the Politicians and Pundits—and Won, (ForeEdge, Nov. 2014), reviewed by The Daily Beast.

Recent movie:

• One Generation Away: The Erosion of Religious Liberty, (American Family Studios, Sept. 2014), reviewed by The Forward.

Canada's Supreme Court Will Review Two Trinity Western Law School Cases

On Feb. 23, the Supreme Court of Canada agreed to hear appeals in Trinity Western University v. Law Society of Upper Canada (Ontario) (summary of case) and Law Society of British Columbia v. Trinity Western University, et. al. (British Columbia) (summary of case). At issue is the question of whether the Law Societies in various provinces can refuse to accredit Trinity Western University Law School because of its code of conduct based on evangelical Christian teachings.  In particular, the law school refuses to recognize same-sex marriages and requires students to sign its Community Covenant that, among other things, prohibits sexual intimacy outside of a marriage between one man and one woman. TaxProf Blog has more on the Supreme Court's action. [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

Britain's Equality Commission Reports On Religion In the Workplace and Service Delivery

Yesterday Britain's Equality and Human Rights Commission released a report on its Consultation launched last year seeking evidence on religious discrimination and accommodation in Britain. The 218-page report, titled Religion or Belief in the Workplace and Service Delivery, reports on information received from nearly 2500 individuals and organizations. Here is an excerpt from the Commission's summary of key findings:

Some employees or service users stated that they had experienced no or few negative issues in their workplace or in receiving a service which they attributed to the view of employers or service providers that religion or belief was a private matter and should not be discussed in the workplace or the service.

Some employees and students stated that they had encountered hostile and unwelcoming environments.... The issues raised concerned the recruitment process, working conditions, including the wearing of religious clothing or symbols, promotion and progression, and time off work for religious holidays and holy days. Some reported that particular beliefs were mocked or dismissed in the workplace or classroom, or criticised unwelcome 'preaching' or proselytising, or the expression of hurtful or derogatory remarks aimed at particular groups....

Many participants were concerned about the right balance between the freedom to express religious views and the right of others to be free from discrimination or harassment. Specific issues raised included conscientious objection in relation to marriage of same sex couples and how to protect employees from harassment and discrimination by staff, customers or service users with a religion. There was a marked divergence of opinion about when it was desirable and appropriate to discuss religious beliefs with service users during the delivery of a service.

The Commission's press release on the report emphasized some of the concerns expressed by respondents. The report is discussed further at Law & Religion UK blog.

British Court Says Employer Breached Contract In Disciplining Christian Employee For Facebook Remarks

In Smith v. Trafford Housing Trust, (EWHC, Nov. 16, 2012), a British trial court (the England and Wales High Court Chancery Division) held that a non-profit organization that owns rental properties across the Borough of Trafford was in breach of contract when it demoted a Christian employee because of Facebook postings he made opposing performing of same-sex marriages in churches. The housing trust had argued that their employee, by making the posting, violated its employee code of conduct and its equal opportunity policy. Rejecting those contentions, Mr. Justice Briggs wrote in part:

I do not consider that any reasonable reader of Mr Smith’s Facebook wall page could rationally conclude that his two postings about gay marriage in church were made in any relevant sense on the Trust’s behalf....

The prohibition on the promotion of the political and religious views in the Code of Conduct did not, as a matter of interpretation and application, extend to Mr Smith’s Facebook wall....

Mr Smith’s use of his Facebook involved his work colleagues only to the extent that they sought his views by becoming his Facebook friends, and that did not detract to any significant extent from the essentially personal and social nature of his use of it as a medium for communication.

BreakingNews.ie and The Register both report on the decision.

British Court Enjoins Protests Against School's LGBT Curriculum

In Birmingham City Council v. Afsar, (EWHC, Nov. 26, 2019), a trial judge in the High Court in the British city of Birmingham held that an injunction should be issued limiting the manner in which demonstrators can protest an elementary school's curriculum on LGBT issues. According to the court:

The case has been pleaded and argued in various ways, but at its heart is the argument that the School’s teaching policy – described by the defendants as “the teaching of LGBT issues (ie teaching equalities)” – represents or involves unlawful discrimination against British Pakistani Muslim children at the School, and those with parental responsibility for them ... on grounds of race and/or religion. It is submitted that the core religious, philosophical and cultural values of this group “are centred on heterosexual relationships in marriage; this state of belief does not encompass same sex relationships”. ....

The court held that the Equality Act 2010 excludes from its coverage anything done in connection with the content of curriculum. In any event, the court concluded:

The teaching has been misunderstood and misinterpreted by the defendants, and misrepresented, sometimes grossly misrepresented, in the course of the protests. The matters that have actually been taught are limited, and lawful. 

The court went on:

The evidence – including but not limited to the expert evidence - persuades me that the levels of noise generated by this way of protesting is clearly excessive, amounting to an intrusion into the lives of those at the School and its neighbours that goes well beyond anything that could be justified as proportionate to the aims of persuasion. 

The court held, however, that an earlier injunction banning the use of social media by protesters should be lifted, saying in part:

The speech with which I am here concerned has been expressed in the context of a private, or limited, WhatsApp group. It was not aimed at the teachers, in the sense that they were intended to read it. It has come to their attention only as a result of disclosures made by one or more members of that group. The scale, frequency, nature and impact of the abuse to date, given its context, do not give rise to a sufficiently compelling case for interference.

The court also issued a summary of the decision. The British publication Conservative Women published an article highly critical of the decision.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Micah Schwartzman, Must Laws Be Motivated by Public Reason? (Public Reason and Courts (Silje Langvatn, et al. eds., Cambridge University Press, Forthcoming).
• Oana Horhogea, Law and Religion. The Mystical Link, (June 30, 2019).
• Cecile Laborde, Abortion, Marriage and Cognate Problems, (American Journal of Jurisprudence (July 2018)).
• Matthew Segal, America’s Conscience: The Rise of Civil Society Groups Under President Trump, (UCLA Law Review, Vol. 65, No. 6, 2018).
• Charles A. Sullivan, Making Too Much of Too Little?: Why 'Motivating Factor' Liability Did Not Revolutionize Title VII, (August 2, 2019).
• Eric Steven Smith, Exploiting the Charitable Contribution Deduction's Hypersalience, (Utah Law Review, Forthcoming).

From SSRN (Non-US Law):

• Leah Bornstein-Makovetsky, The Welfare of the Minor As a Fundamental Principle Guiding Guardianship and Custody Issues in Ottoman Jewish Society, (Forthcoming, International Journal of the Jurisprudence of the Family).
• Harlan Grant Cohen, The Primitive Lawyer Speaks!: Thoughts on the Concepts of International and Rabbinic Laws, (Villanova Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Avishalom Westreich, Surrogacy and Egg Donation in Israel: Legal Arrangements, Difficulties, and Challenges, (Fundamental Legal Problems of Surrogate Motherhood - Global Perspective (Piotr Mostowik, ed., Warsaw, 2019)).
• Sujit Choudhry, Postcolonial Proportionality: Johar, Transformative Constitutionalism and Same Sex Rights in India, (Philipp Dann, ed., The Global South and Comparative Constitutional Law (Oxford University Press, Forthcoming)).
• Ayesha Umar, Assessing Social Inclusion through Transgender Legal Reforms in Pakistan, (October 7, 2018).
• Erum Sattar, Property Rights for Landless Agricultural Workers and the Flexibility of Hanafi Land Law Jurisprudence: A Solution for Rural Displacement?, (August 1, 2019).

From SmartCILP:

• Michael Arthur Vacca, Education and Religious Freedom in the Toledo Guiding Principles: A Comparative Analysis Between the Holy See and the United States, 36 Arizona Journal of International & Comparative Law 111-132 (2019).
• Daniel Altaras, Separation of Synagogue and State in Israel, 36 Arizona Journal of International & Comparative Law 133-163 (2019).
• James D. Nelson, Corporate Disestablishment, 105 Virginia Law Review 595-654 (2019).
• Samuel W. Calhoun, Inappropriate for Establishment Clause Scrutiny: Reflections on Mary Nobles Hancock's Note. God Save the United States and this Honorable County Board of Commissioners: Lund, Bormuth, and the Fight Over Legislative Prayer, 76 Washington & Lee Law Review 485-508 (2019).

Britain To Permit Civil Partnership Ceremonies On Religious Premises

On Wednesday, Britain's Equalities Office published a summary of the responses to its consultation on regulatory changes that would permit same-sex civil partnership ceremonies to take place on the premises of religious institutions in England and Wales. The report includes a draft of The Marriages and Civil Partnerships (Approved Premises) (Amendment) Regulations 2011 to implement the changes. (Full text of report.) The report says:

Making this change will allow those religious organisations that wish to do so to host civil partnership registrations on their religious premises. This voluntary provision is a positive step forward for both LGB rights and religious freedom.

The decision by any particular faith group on whether they wish their premises to be designated for civil partnership ceremonies is entirely voluntary.  The proposed regulations will leave it up to local authorities to decide whether they will as well designate clergy who apply to become civil partnership registrars. The draft Regulations will be laid before Parliament so they can come into force by the end of 2011.  The government also promised to publish a consultation document in March 2012 on equal civil marriage. Anglican Journal on Wednesday reported on developments.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Shaakirrah Sanders, Religious Healing Exemptions and the Jurisprudential Gap Between Substantive Due Process and Free Exercise Rights, (8 U.C. Irvine L. Rev. 633 (2018)).
• Farnush Ghadery, 'Sticking to Their Guns': The United Nations' Failure to See the Potential of Islamic Feminism for the Promotion of Women's Rights in Afghanistan, (October 8, 2019).
• Perry Dane, 'Avinu, Malkeinu, Kin(g) of All the Earth': A Yom Kippur D’var Torah, (October 4, 2019).
• Dimitry Kochenov & Uladzislau Belavusau, Same-Sex Spouses in the EU after Coman: More Free Movement, But What about Marriage?, (EUI Working Paper (Florence) No. 2019/3).
• Deepa Das Acevedo, Just Hindus, (Law & Social Inquiry (2020, Forthcoming)).
• Joshua Jones, Title IX's Substantive Equity Mandate for Transgender Persons in American Law Schools: A Call to Disaggregate SOGI Data, (Forthcoming, Spring 2020, Vol. 44.3 NYU Review of Law and Social Change).
• Andrew T. Hayashi, The Law and Economics of Animus, (Virginia Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper No. 2019-57).

Pope Francis Met With Kim Davis; Supports Conscientious Objection

In a press release issued yesterday, Liberty Counsel disclosed that Rowan County, Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis met with Pope Francis at the Vatican Embassy in Washington last Thursday. Davis' husband was also at the private meeting during which the Pope, speaking in English, thanked Davis for her courage and presented her with rosaries for her parents who are Catholic. Davis has refused to issue marriage licences to same-sex couples, and was jailed for contempt for several days as a result. (See prior posting.) In a press conference on his plane back to Rome (before the meeting with Davis was announced publicly), the Pope told reporters that conscientious objection is a human right. When asked whether that applies to government officials, the Pope responded: "It is a human right and if a government official is a human person, he has that right."

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Sahar F. Aziz, Reflections on Security, Race, and Rights Twenty Years After 9/11, (12 J. Nat'l Sec. L. & Pol. 135 (2021)).
• Carl H. Esbeck, An Extended Essay on Church Autonomy, (22 Federalist Society Review 244 (2021)).
• Richard W. Garnett & Mitchell Koppinger, Tandon v. Newsome, South Bay Pentecostal, & Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn on Religious Liberty and the Pandemic, (Ch. 13, M. Marietta, ed., SCOTUS 2021: Major Decisions and Developments of the U.S. Supreme Court (Forthcoming 2021)).
• Nausica Palazzo, Marriage Apostates: Why Heterosexuals Seek Same-Sex Registered Partnerships, (Columbia Journal of Gender and Law, Forthcoming).
• Duncan Kennedy, Consciousness, Doctrine, and Politics in the History of American Family Law, (February 2, 2020).

From SSRN (Non-U.S. Law):

• Robert C. Blitt, Russia’s 2020 Constitutional Amendments and the Entrenchment of the Moscow Patriarchate as a Lever of Foreign Policy Soft Power, (Peter Mandaville (ed.), The Geopolitics of Religious Soft Power: How States Use Religion in Foreign Policy, Oxford University Press, Forthcoming 2022).
• Thomas McMahon, Canada Needs the Every Child Matters Act: What Needs to Be in the Act, (September 30, 2021).
• Saud Alholiby & Zakaria A. Almulhim, From the Lack to the Requirement: The Public Consultation Reform in Saudi Arabia, (UCLA Journal of Islamic and Near Eastern Law, Forthcoming).
• Christian Bjørnskov, Stefan Voigt & Mahdi Khesali,   Unconstitutional States of Emergency, (August 30, 2021).

From SmartCILP:

• Fatemah AlBader, Cultural Oppression Disguised as Religious Obligation: A Fatal Misrepresentation to the Advancement of Muslim Women's Rights in the Context of the So-Called Honor Killings, 24 Asian Pacific American Law Journal 1-16 (2020).
• Stephanie Hennette-Vauchez, Religious Neutrality, Laicite and Colorblindness: A Comparative Analysis, 42 Cardozo Law Review 539-596 (2021).
• Mark Strasser, Conscience Clauses and the Placement of Children: Introduction, 15 Journal of Law & Family Studies 1-18 (2013).

Roy Moore Moves To Run-Off Against Luther Strange In Alabama U.S. Senate Primary

As reported by AP and the New York Times, former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore came in first, capturing 38.9% of the vote, in yesterday's Alabama Republican primary for U.S. Senate. He will face incumbent Luther Strange, who received 32.8% of the vote, in the second round of the primary on Sept. 26.  Moore was removed as Chief Justice in 2003 when he refused to obey a court order to remove a Ten Commandments monument that stood on the state courthouse grounds.  After being re-elected as Chief Justice, last year he was suspended from his position for instructing probate judges to deny marriage licenses to same-sex couples. (See prior posting.)

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Paul T. Babie, Australia and Australian External Territories in Brill, Encyclopedia of Law and Religion (July 2016).
• Melissa Crouch, Promiscuity, Polygyny and the Power of Revenge: The Past and Future of Burmese Buddhist Law in Myanmar, (Asian Journal of Law and Society, Special Issue on Buddhism and Law in Asia, Forthcoming).
• Eva Brems, Objections to Anti-Discrimination in the Name of Conscience or Religion: A Conflicting Rights Approach, (Forthcoming in The Conscience Wars: Rethinking the Balance between Religion, Identity, and Equality (Susanna Mancini & Michel Rosenfeld eds., Cambridge University Press, 2017)).
• Claudia E. Haupt, Religious Outliers: Professional Knowledge Communities, Individual Conscience Claims, and the Availability of Professional Services to the Public, (Law, Religion, and Health in the United States (Holly Fernandez Lynch, I. Glenn Cohen, & Elizabeth Sepper eds. Cambridge Univ. Press, 2017 Forthcoming)).
• Perry Dane, Scopes of Religious Exemption: A Normative Map, (Religious Exemptions, Oxford University Press, Forthcoming).
• Christopher McCrudden, Marriage Registrars, Same-Sex Relationships, and Religious Discrimination in the European Court of Human Rights, (July 20, 2016).
• Peter J. Boettke, Joshua C. Hall & Kathleen M. Sheehan, Was Adam Smith Right about Religious Competition?, (West Virginia University, Department of Economics, Working Paper No. 15-47 (2015)).
• Melissa Crouch, Introduction: Islam and the State in Myanmar, (Melissa Crouch (ed), Islam and the State in Myanmar: Muslim-Buddhist Relations and the Politics of Belonging. Oxford University Press, 2016, Forthcoming).
• Oonagh B. Breen, Guardians of the Charitable Realm: Charitable Trust Supervision Practice and Procedure in the Common Law World, (European Review of Private Law, Forthcoming).

From SmartCILP and elsewhere:

• Benjamin Porat, Ownership and Exclusivity: Two Visions, Two Traditions, 64 American Journal of Comparative Law 147-190 (2016).
• Richard A. Epstein, Religious Liberty Under Siege In Mississippi, (Hoover Institution, Defining Ideas, July 18, 2016).

Therapist Sues After Dismissal For Refusing To Counsel Gay Couple

A religious discrimination lawsuit was filed last week in Michigan federal district court by a licensed clinical social worker against her former employer, HealthSource Saginaw.  The complaint (full text) in Lorentzen v. Healthsource Saginaw, Inc., (ED MI, filed 5/11/2018) alleges that Kathleen Lorentzen was informed that she would be terminated, and was subjected to demeaning, threatening and abusive actions, after she insisted on referring a same-sex couple to a different therapist for marriage counseling. Lorentzen says that continuing to counsel the couple would violate her Catholic religious beliefs. The complaint alleges violations of Title VII and of various state law provisions. Thomas More Law Center issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

Judicial Inquiry Commission Files Complaint Against Alabama CJ

As reported by AP, the Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission yesterday filed a Complaint (full text) against Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore contending that Moore abused his authority and acted in violation of the Code of Judicial Ethics when in January he issued an administrative order to all probate judges telling them that they had a duty under Alabama law to continue to refuse to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. (See prior posting.)  Moore's action ignored federal court orders to the contrary.

Wisconsin Diocese Charged With Election Violations

Wisconsin election law requires any group that spends over $25 to support or oppose a state referendum to register with the State Elections Board. The Wisconsin Democracy Campaign (WDC) has sent a memo to the State Elections Board charging that the Catholic Diocese of Madison violated this provision when Bishop Robert Morlino passed out a flier to all parishioners urging them to support a November 7 constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriages. Channel 3000 today reports Morlino's response: "a law that tells me I should have recourse to the state or commission in order to teach the truth of Christ about marriage in my own churches is an obstacle to our own free expression of religion." WDC has also issued a release on the matter.

Will Britain Require Clergy To Bless Gays and Give Them Communion?

A posting last week discussed some of the concerns that religious groups in England have about proposed British government regulations banning discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in furnishing goods and services. Those concerns related to services offered by religiously affiliated organizations. Today LifeSiteNews reports the Church of England is suggesting that the regulations could have a much more direct impact on core functions of the Church itself. It says that under the proposed regulations it will be illegal for churches to deny gay and lesbian couples use of churches for civil commitment ceremonies, and clergy would be required to bless same-sex couples. It says that communion falls under the definition of services, so it would be illegal for a clergyman to deny communion to homosexuals.

In fact it seems unlikely that the final regulations will be this broad. Here is what the March 2006 Consultation Paper said about the issue:

Churches, mosques and many other religious organisations advance their faith or belief through activities such as worship, teaching and preaching, officiating in marriage, conducting baptisms and giving sacraments to members of their religious community. We recognise that there may be circumstances where the new regulations could impact on aspects of religious activity or practice in the light of the doctrines of some faiths concerning sexual orientation and the beliefs of their followers. We need to consider therefore the application of the regulations in these areas.

We are interested to hear views on the impact that the regulations may have in these areas, particularly where the regulations may impede religious observance or practices that arise from the basic doctrines of a faith. Any exceptions from the regulations for religious organisations would need to be clearly defined and our starting point is that these should be limited to activities closely linked to religious observance or practices that arise from the basic doctrines of a faith.

DC Appellate Court Upholds Refusal To Allow Initiative On Defining Marriage

In Jackson v. District of Columbia Board of Elections and Ethics, (DC Ct. App., July 15, 2010), D.C.'s highest appellate court [corrected], in a 5-4 decision, upheld the Board of Elections and Ethics refusal to accept a petition seeking an initiative vote on a proposed amendment to D.C. statutes to bar the recognition of same sex marriages. The majority concluded:

The Council acted within its authority under the CAA [Charter Amendment Act] and the Home Rule Act in enacting the Human Rights safeguard of the IPA [Initiative Procedures Act] and in directing the Board not to accept initiatives that contravene that safeguard. Because appellants' proposed initiative would authorize, or have the effect of authorizing, discrimination on a basis prohibited by the Human Rights Act, it was not a proper subject of initiative. Therefore, the Board acted lawfully in refusing to accept the initiative on that basis.

A dissenting of 4 judges opinion argued that D.C City Council exceeded its authority when it imposed the "Human Rights Act limitation" on the right of initiative. [See prior related posting.]