Obama Cites Sermon on Mount In Support of Civil Unions

Yesterday's Christian Post reports that Sen. Barack Obama created some consternation among evangelicals while campaigning in Ohio last Sunday. He cited Jesus' Sermon on the Mount to back his support for gay civil unions. Responding to a question from a local pastor, Obama said: "I believe in civil unions that allow a same-sex couple to visit each other in a hospital or transfer property to each other. I don't think it should be called marriage, but I think that it is a legal right that they should have that is recognized by the state. If people find that controversial, then I would just refer them to the Sermon on the Mount, which I think is, in my mind, for my faith, more central than an obscure passage in Romans." Commenting on Obama's position, Pastor John Barner, manager of pastoral care at Focus on the Family, said: "We believe isolated portions of Scripture should not be used to justify a personal preference or a social position that goes in a different direction than the overall message of Scripture."

Alabama Commission Hires Law Prof To Prosecute Charges Against Chief Justice

As previously reported, earlier this month the Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission filed ethics charges against Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore over his 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 despite federal court orders to the contrary. Now, as reported by AL.com, the Judicial Inquiry Commission has hired John Carroll,   professor and former dean of the Cumberland School of Law and former interim director of the Alabama Ethics Commission to prosecute the case against Moore.  In a strongly worded press release yesterday, Moore's attorneys, Liberty Counsel, objected to Carroll because of his service 32 years ago as Legal Director of the Southern Poverty Law Center. SPLC includes Liberty Counsel on its list of Extremist Groups.

Court Applies Younger Abstention To Alabama Chief Justice's Suit Over Temporary Removal

In Moore v. Judicial Inquiry Commission of the State of Alabama, (MD AL, Aug. 4, 2016), an Alabama federal district court, applying the Younger abstention doctrine, dismissed a suit brought by Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore challenging a provision of the Alabama Constitution that provides a judge formally charged with misconduct shall be disqualified from acting as a judge while the complaint is pending.  Moore is charged with judicial misconduct because of his issuance, after the U.S. Supreme Court's Obergefell decision, of 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.)   As reported by the Washington Times, Alabama is the only state with an automatic removal provision for judges charged with misconduct.   A hearing before the Judicial Inquiry Commission on the case is scheduled for Monday.

Kim Davis Loses Re-election Bid

According to the Lexington Herald-Leader, in Rowan County, Kentucky on Tuesday, county clerk Kim Davis lost her re-election bid by some 650 votes. Davis garnered national attention in 2015 by her adamant refusal to sign marriage licenses for same-sex couples. (See prior posting).

Recent Articles and Books of Interest

From SSRN:

• Kara Loewentheil, When Free Exercise Is A Burden: Protecting 'Third Parties' in Religious Accommodation Law, (August 6, 2013).
• Susan C. Hascall, Islamic Commercial Law and Social Justice: Shari’ah Compliant Companies, Workers’ Rights, and the Living Wage, (St. John's Law Review, Vol. 88, No. 1, 2014).
• Engy Abdelkader, To Judge or Not to Judge: A Comparative Analysis of Islamic Jurisprudential Approaches to Female Judges in the Muslim World (Indonesia, Egypt and Iran), (Fordham International Law Journal, Forthcoming).
• Iain T. Benson, Religious Interfaith Work in Canada and South Africa with Particular Focus on the Drafting of a South African Charter of Religious Rights and Freedoms, (HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies 69(1), Art. #1319, DOI: org/10.4102/hts.v69i1.1319 (2013)).
• Muhammad Munir, Freedom of Expression, Information, Thought and Religion in Islam and Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), (July 13, 2013).

From SmartCILP:

• William E. Nelson, The Persistence of Puritan Law: Massachusetts, 1660-1760, [Abstract], 49 Willamette Law Review 307-409 (2013).

New Books:

• Steven D. Smith, The Rise and Decline of American Religious Freedom, (Harvard Univ. Press, Feb. 2014).
• Kimberly D. Richman, License to Wed: What Legal Marriage Means to Same-Sex Couples, (NYU Press, Dec. 2013).

Top Church-State and Religious Liberty Developments of 2017

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.  Usually I select the top ten, but this year I have expanded it to 11. The selection 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 Eleven picks for the rather chaotic year that is currently coming to an end:

1.  President Trump issues and reissues restrictions on immigration and entry of refugees which are challenged in the courts as "Muslim bans."

2. Supreme Court's Trinity Lutheran Church decision opens the possibility of expanded governmental aid to religious institutions.

3. Christian Evangelicals remain core supporters of Donald Trump.

4. Trump Administration expands religious and moral exemptions from ACA contraceptive coverage mandate; court challenges filed.

5. The Masterpiece Cakeshop case attracts over 90 amicus briefs as it is argued before the Supreme Court.  The Christian baker's refusal to create a wedding cake for a same-sex couple becomes a symbol of the cultural clash between ideals of religious freedom and equality, even though arguments focus on free speech issues.

6. Congress fails to repeal the Johnson Amendment, despite promises by President Trump.

7. Transgender discrimination and transgender service in the military remain high profile religious and cultural issues in the courts and in the political arena.

8. The Alt-Right march in Charlottesville reveals resurgence of traditional forms of  anti-Semitism.

9. Supreme Court's decision in Advocate Health Care Network v. Stapleton saves retirement plans of religiously affiliated health care networks from unanticipated and costly ERISA coverage.

10. In Israel, government's suspension of an agreement with Judaism's Reform and Conservative movements to construct a separate prayer space at the Western Wall for egalitarian prayer opens a rift with a large segment of the American Jewish community.

11. India's Supreme Court invalidates Triple Talaq marriage for Muslims in India.

For top picks by other observers of the legal and religious scene, see Don Byrd's Top Ten Religious Liberty Stories, and  Religion News Association's Top 10 Religion Stories of the Year Poll.

Roy Moore's Internal Court Memos Disclosed

As previously reported, in May the Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission filed a Complaint 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. Now, as reported by The Advocate, pleadings filed with the Judicial Inquiry Commission (full text) include redacted versions of two memos which Moore sent to the other Justices urging them to issue an opinion providing guidance to probate court judges.  He wrote in part:

Obergefell is particularly egregious because it mandates submission in violation of religious conscience (ask Kim Davis). Either go along or be disqualified from holding public office. In the near future Christians like Clerk Kim Davis will be driven out of public life, forced to forsake their faith or their livelihood....

 As Justice Alito stated, Obergefell "will be used to vilify Americans who are unwilling to assent to the new orthodoxy" and "to stamp out every vestige of dissent." ... The suppression of all dissent is now underway.

To paraphrase Martin Niemoller: They came for the florists, but I didn't deal in flowers; They came for the bakers, but I didn't bake cakes; They came for a county clerk in Kentucky, but that seemed far away; Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak out.

Alabama's CJ Roy Moore Files Brief In Appeal of His Suspension

As previously reported, in September Alabama's 9-member Court of the Judiciary (COJ) concluded that Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore violated various Canons of Judicial Ethics in issuing an order to state probate judges telling them they had a duty under Alabama law to refuse to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The COJ suspended Moore from office for the remaining two years of his term.  This decision is now on appeal to a specially constituted bench of the Alabama Supreme Court, the regular Justices having recused themselves. Yesterday, Moore filed a 95-page brief setting out his arguments. The brief summarizes them in part as follows:

The JIC [Judicial Inquiry Commission and the COJ did not have the jurisdiction or authority to review the Administrative Orders of the Chief Justice, as such authority is placed solely in this Court.

The COJ violated Rule 16 by imposing a de facto removal (i.e., permanent suspension without pay) upon Chief Justice Moore without the unanimous concurrence of all sitting members....

All charges against Chief Justice Moore must be dismissed because they have no legal basis and are not supported by clear and convincing evidence.... 

Section 159 of the Alabama Constitution, which imposes an automatic suspension upon the mere filing of a complaint with the COJ, represents a gross violation of due process in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment....

The JIC violated the confidentiality mandated by the Alabama Constitution and Rule 5 by disclosing information about Chief Justice Moore’s matter prior to filing charges and the penalty should be dismissal of all charges.

Liberty Counsel issued a press release announcing the filing of the brief.

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."