Republican Senators Call For Roy Moore To Withdraw From Senate Race After Sex Charges

According to the Washington Post, a number of Republican senators are calling for Roy Moore, Alabama candidate for the U.S. Senate, to withdraw if charges in an earlier Washington Post article today are true.  The article, based on detailed interviews with named accusers, says that Moore engaged in improper sexual contact with a 14-year old girl nearly 40 years ago when Moore was a 32 year-old assistant district attorney.  Three other women say Moore tried to date them when they were between 16 and 18 years old.  Moore, well known for his battles defending a Ten Commandments monument and opposing same-sex marriage, says that the charges "are completely false and are a desperate political attack by the National Democrat Party and the Washington Post."  The special election in Alabama in which Moore faces Democratic nominee Doug Jones is scheduled for Dec. 12.

UPDATE: Defending Moore, Alabama State Auditor Jim Zeigler told the Washington Examiner:  "[T]ake Joseph and Mary. Mary was a teenager and Joseph was an adult carpenter. They became parents of Jesus. There’s just nothing immoral or illegal here. Maybe just a little bit unusual."

USDA Memo Gives Meat Packing Plants Broad Religious Speech Protection

ADF reported yesterday on a new Guidance Memorandum on First Amendment Policy issued by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Office of Food Safety (full text), and a related Q&A webpage.  While the Guidance Memorandum appears to flow from President Trump's Executive Order Promoting Free Speech and Religious Liberty issued in May (see prior posting), and a follow-on Memo from the Secretary of Agriculture, it also resolves a particular dispute relating to a Michigan meat-packing plant. Federal meat inspectors working at the plant had removed an article placed on the plant's break room table that expressed religious views opposed to same-sex marriage.  Apparently a USDA official, invoking an Obama-era Policy Statement on sexual harassment,  had threatened to withdraw all its inspectors if the article reappeared.  The new Guidance Memorandum gives broad permission for employees and supervisors at meat plants to express religious views, saying in part:

Employees are permitted to engage in religious expression directed at fellow employees and may attempt to persuade other employees of the correctness of their views.  Religious views should be treated the same as any other comparable speech not involving religion. Proselytizing is as entitled to constitutional protection as any other form of speech.

Supervisors are also free to engage in speech about religion.  While supervisors may not impose unfair work conditions on employees who do not share their religious beliefs, their personal views concerning religion are still protected by the First Amendment.  As a result, supervisors may also express their sincere religious views without fear of sanctions.

Some employers in facilities that are inspected by USDA may wish to display religious icons, religious pamphlets, or faith-based messages in publicly available work areas or on public websites.  Others may support employee religious organizations and openly express their own religious beliefs or practices in the workplace.  USDA employees must act to avoid the limiting or chilling of protected speech.

The Guidance Memorandum adds that USDA employees who believe they are subject to discrimination, harassment or intimidation may still exercise their rights.

British Court Upholds Removal of Christian Social Work Student Over Facebook Comments

As reported by The Guardian and by a press release from Christian Concern, a British trial court judge yesterday upheld a decision by Sheffield University to remove graduate student Felix Ngole from his 2-year MA program in Social Work because of comments he posted on Facebook.  In 2015, commenting on the widely publicized case of Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis, Ngole, a devout Christian, said: "same sex marriage is a sin whether we like it or not. It is God’s words and man’s sentiments would not change His words." Ngole argued that the University's action infringed his free expression rights.  High Court Judge Rowena Collins Rice ruled, however:

Public religious speech has to be looked at in a regulated context from the perspective of a public readership. Social workers have considerable power over the lives of vulnerable service users and trust is a precious professional commodity.

Mississippi Suit On Gay Marriage Recusals Is Reopened

In June, the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed for lack of standing a challenge to Mississippi's broad Conscience Protection Act. (See prior posting.) In October, an en banc rehearing was denied.  In light of this, yesterday a Mississippi federal district court in Campaign for Southern Equality v. Bryant, (SD MI, Oct. 27, 2017), issued an order (full text) reopening a challenge to the law insofar as it allows county clerks to recuse themselves from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples because of religious or moral objections to same-sex marriage.  The Order also authorized plaintiffs to serve interrogatories to determine how many Clerk's Offices have employees that have sought to recuse themselves, and how the recusals are handled. AP reports on the order.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Marc O. DeGirolami, On the Uses of Anti-Christian Identity Politics, (Religious Freedom and LGBT Rights: Possibilities and Challenges for Finding Common Ground (Robin Fretwell Wilson & William Eskridge eds., Cambridge University Press, Forthcoming)).
• Adam Hersh, Daniel in the Lion's Den: A Structural Reconsideration of Religious Exemptions from Nondiscrimination Laws Since Obergefell, (Stanford Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Marc O. DeGirolami, The Two Separations, (The Cambridge Companion to the First Amendment and Religious Liberty (Michael Breidenbach & Owen Anderson eds., Cambridge University Press, Forthcoming)).
• Michael J. Perry, Conscience v. Access and the Morality of Human Rights, With Particular Reference to Same-Sex Marriage, (William Eskridge and Robin Fretwell Wilson (eds.), Religious Freedom, LGBT Rights, and the Prospects for Common Ground (Cambridge University Press), Forthcoming).
• Robin Bradley Kar, Transformational Marriage: How to End the Culture Wars Over Same-Sex Marriage, (The Contested Place of Religion in Family Life (Cambridge University Press 2018) (Robin Fretwell Wilson, ed.), Forthcoming).
• John Osogo Ambani, A Triple Heritage of Sexuality? Regulation of Sexual Orientation in Africa in Historical Perspective, (Sylvie Namwase & Adrian Jjuuko, Protecting the Human Rights of Sexual Minorities in Contemporary Africa, Pretoria University Law Press, 2017).
• Nathan B. Oman, Commerce, Religion, and the Rule of Law, (Journal of Law, Religion & the State, (Forthcoming)).
• Zachary D. Kaufman, Jesner v. Arab Bank: U.S. Foreign Policy and National Security Interests, (Just Security, 2017).
• Mark Stern, et. al., The Judicial and Generational Dispute over Transgender Rights, (Stanford Law & Policy Review, Vol. 29, No. 1, Forthcoming).
• Mark Strasser, Marriage, Divorce, and Domicile, (85 University of Missouri-Kansas City Law Review 145-86 (2016)).
• Dana Brakman Reiser, Disruptive Philanthropy: Zuckerberg, the Limited Liability Company, and the Millionaire next Door, (Brooklyn Law School, Legal Studies Paper No. 536 (2017)).

From SmartCILP:

• J. Shoshanna Ehrlich, Ministering (In)justice: The Supreme Court's Misreliance on Abortion Regret in Gonzales v. Carhart, [Abstract],17 Nevada Law Journal 599-617 (2017).
• Rene Reyes, The Mixed Blessings of (Non-)Establishment, 80 Albany Law Review 405-428 (2016-2017).
• Lisa Shaw Roy, The Unexplored Implications of Town of Greece v. Galloway, 80 Albany Law Review 877-891 (2016-2017).

Roy Moore Wins Republican Runoff In Alabama

Former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore won yesterday's Alabama Republican U.S. Senate primary runoff, prevailing over Luther Strange who has served in the U.S. Senate for six months.  Moore won by a vote of 55% to 45%. (Official results).

As reported by CNN:

Moore now faces Democratic nominee Doug Jones in a December general election in the race to replace Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

Moore's win Tuesday night will thrust his long history of homophobic and racially tinged remarks into the spotlight.

He has campaigned on a platform of placing Christianity at the center of public life. In 2003, Moore was removed as state Supreme Court chief justice for refusing to take down a Ten Commandments monument. He was re-elected to the job, and then ousted again in 2016, when he refused to follow the US Supreme Court's ruling legalizing same-sex marriage.

Though Alabama is a solidly red state, Democrats hope Jones, a former federal prosecutor who rose to prominence by leading the government's case against two perpetrators of the 16th Street Baptist Church bombing, can make the race competitive.

Here is additional background on Moore from Wikipedia.

Moore Tweeted from his victory rally: "There's one person you don't see on this stage that's done more for my campaign than anybody, and that's almighty God."  In a second Tweet, he added: "We have to return to the acknowledgment of God, and the United States Constitution."

Today Is Alabama Senate Primary Runoff Between Moore and Strange

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

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Rahman Apalara, Striking a Balance: Freedom of Expression and the Prohibition of Hate Speech and Offensive Remarks, (September 11, 2017).
• Nadia N. Sawicki, A Common Law Duty to Disclose Conscience-Based Limitations on Medical Practice, (Chapter 13 in Law, Religion, and Health in the United States (Lynch, Holly Fernandez, I. Glenn Cohen, and Elizabeth Sepper eds., 2017).
• Nomi Maya Stolzenberg, From Eternity to Here: In Search of the Origins of Secularism, (USC Legal Studies Research Papers Series No. 17-20 (2017)).
• Adam J. White, Justice Scalia's Soulcraft as Statecraft, (June 15, 2017).
• Noa Ben-Asher, Faith-Based Emergency Powers, (Harvard Journal of Law and Gender, Forthcoming).
• Steven J. Heyman, The Light of Nature: John Locke, Natural Rights, and the Origins of American Religious Liberty, (Marquette Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Terri Lynn Helge, Rejecting Charity: Why the IRS Denies Tax Exemption to 501(C)(3) Applicants, (Pittsburgh Tax Review, Vol. 14, No. 1, 2016).

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

• Ming-Sung Kuo & Hui-Wen Chen, The Brown Moment in Taiwan: Making Sense of the Law and Politics of the Taiwanese Same-Sex Marriage Case in a Comparative Light, (Columbia Journal of Asian Law, Forthcoming).
• Mehdi Shadmehr, Khomeini's Theory of Islamic State and the Making of the Iranian Revolution, (September 16, 2017).
• Jikon Lai, Lena Rethel & Kerstin Steiner, Conceptualizing Dynamic Challenges to Global Financial Diffusion: Islamic Finance and the Grafting of Sukuk, (Review of International Political Economy, 2017).
• Aklavya Anand & Shailesh Kumar, Public Domain of Personal Laws: An Inquiry from the Perspectives of Conflict of Interests and Identities, (NLSIU Journal of Law and Public Policy, Volume IV, Special Issue, 2017).

From SmartCILP:

• Wim Decock, Law, Religion, and Debt Relief: Balancing Above the 'Abyss of Despair' in Early Modern Canon Law and Theology, [Abstract], 57 American Journal of Legal History 125-141 (2017).
• Anton Sorkin, Graduation Ceremonies: A Prayer for Balancing Sponsorship and Censorship, 41 Southern Illinois University Law Journal 345-402 (2017).

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.]

Louisiana AG Opinion Says ABA Model Rule Barring Discrimination Is Unconstitutional

The Louisiana State Bar Association is considering adopting an amendment to its Rules of Professional Conduct that would define professional misconduct as including:

conduct in connection with the practice of law that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know involves discrimination prohibited by law because of race, color, religion, age, gender, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status, or disability.  This rule does not prohibit legitimate advocacy when race, color, religion, age, gender, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status, or disability are issues,nor does it limit the ability of a lawyer to accept, decline or withdraw from a representation in accordance with Rule 1.16.

This is a narrower version of ABA Model Rule 8.4(g) which the ABA House of Delegates adopted in 2016.  Last week, the Louisiana Attorney General's Office issued Attorney General's Opinion 17-0114 which concludes that the ABA version of the Model Rule is likely unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and that while Louisiana's proposed version seeks to avoid many of the constitutional problems, it still suffers from some of the same vagueness and overbreadth issues as does the ABA rule.

In addition to finding that the ABA Model Rule is overbroad and vague, the Opinion also concluded that it violates associational and religious liberty protections, saying in part:

Lawyers participate in a wide variety of associations that engage in expressive conduct which could run afoul of ABA Model Rule 8.4(g), including faith-based legal organizations and activist organizations that promote a specific political or social platform....

ABA Model Rule 8.4(g) could also result in lawyers being punished for practicing their religion.  The United States Supreme Court specifically noted in Obergefell v. Hodges that "those who adhere to religious doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned."  However this type of advocacy appears to be prohibited by ABA Model Rule 8.4(g).... Under Rule 8.4(g), a lawyer who acts as a legal advisor on the board of their church would be engaging in professional misconduct if they participated in a march against same-sex marriage or taught a class at their religious institution against divorce....

AP reports on the Attorney General's Opinion.

South African Court Reconciles Marriage Law With Gender Identity Change Statute

Under South African law, marriages may be performed only for heterosexual couples; however civil unions, which create the same legal rights as a marriage, may be performed for either heterosexual or same-sex couples.  South Africa also has a statute which allows transgender individuals to register their gender transition with the government if they have undergone medical or surgical treatment to alter their sexual characteristics. Registration leads to a change in the gender listed on birth certificates and in the population register. In KOS v. Minister of Home Affairs, (S.A. High Ct., Sept. 6, 2017), a South African trial court was faced with the question of how to treat couples who had entered a heterosexual marriage (not a civil union), where subsequently the husband underwent gender transitioning and registered the change in gender identity with the government.

The government argued that in such cases, a gender change should not be able to be registered since it would result in a same-sex marriage, which the law does not recognize. In one of the cases, the government had instead cancelled the couple's marriage record and insisted that they enter a civil union.  The court however, disagreed concluding that the couples must be allowed to register the gender reassignment and remain married.  Refusing to do this, the court said, violates the rights under the South African Constitution to administrative justice and to equality and human dignity. GroundUp reports on the decision.

Australia's Top Court Upholds Planned Mail Survey of Voters On Same-Sex Marriage

In Wilkie v. Commonwealth of Australia, (High Ct. Australia, Sept. 7, 2017), Australia's highest court unanimously upheld the government's plan to conduct a voluntary survey by mail of the country's voters on whether same-sex marriage should be legalized.  At issue in the case was whether the government acted properly when it used a law permitting expenditures which are urgent and unforeseen to fund the survey.  As reported by news.com.au:

Ballots with the question, “Should the law be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry?” will be sent to households across the nation on September 12....

If a majority of people vote in favour, a vote will then be held in parliament which [Prime Minister Malcolm] Turnbull says he expects will make same-sex marriage legal. If Australians vote no, Mr Turnbull has said the parliamentary vote will not proceed.

The postal survey was conceived after Australia's Senate voted against government sponsored legislation for a binding plebiscite. Interestingly, advocates of marriage equality were among those challenging the plebiscite, arguing that Parliament should legalize same-sex marriage without this preliminary vote. (Marriage Equality Information Sheet).  Law & Religion Australia last month had a lengthy post on the religious liberty implications of the substantive legislation that is being considered.

New Mexico Paramilitary Christian Group Members Arrested In Child Abuse Investigation

Earlier this week, New Mexico authorities raided the Fence Lake (NM) compound of the paramilitary Aggressive Christianity Missions Training Corps in a child abuse investigation.  They arrested sect co-leader Deborah Green and two other group members, while another member was arrested in Truth or Consequences, New Mexico. According to People, the defendants are variously charged with child abuse, criminal sexual penetration, failure to report a birth, and bribery of a witness. Peter Green has been charged with 100 counts of criminal penetration of a child.

Four more sect members were arrested yesterday on charges of failing to register the births of their 11 children.  They were apprehended as they were allegedly trying to flee the state in two vans filed with children. Fox News, reporting this, says that the group describes itself as "revolutionary for Jesus" and provides a free spiritual "ammo pack" to anyone requesting one.  Its website includes anti-Semitic and anti-same sex marriage language.

Discussing interviews with ex-members of the sect, AP reports that:

[L]eaders of the Aggressive Christianity Missions Training Corps exercised control over followers by forcing them into hard labor and refusing to give their children medical care. When members complained, sect co-leader Deborah Green would hold "trials" against them for questioning her authority.... The trials led to banishment to isolated sheds without toilets and from the sect's compound without being allowed to take their children....

Australian Catholic Bishops React To Planned Plebiscite On Same-Sex Marriage

As reported earlier this month by CBC News, Australia's government is planning a mail survey beginning Sept. 12 of Australians on the issue of same-sex marriage. However it is facing a court challenge arguing that the government does not have authority to conduct this type of plebiscite without obtaining authority from Parliament.  Meanwhile the Sydney Morning Herald reported yesterday that Catholic bishops in Australia have threatened that if same-sex marriage is legalized, parish employees, including teachers in Catholic schools, who marry a same-sex partner may well be fired.

Northern Ireland Court Says No Right To Same-Sex Marriage

A trial court judge in the High Court of Northern Ireland yesterday held that the rights of same-sex couples under the European Convention on Human Rights are not infringed by the law of Northern Ireland which allows them only enter civil partnerships rather than full marriage.  As reported by The Independent, the decision comes in two cases heard together.  A press release by the court describes the opinion in one of the cases.  The judge pointed out that the European Court of Human Rights has already held that same-sex marriage is not a right under the Convention.  The judge observed, however:

To the frustration of supporters of same sex marriage the Assembly has not yet passed into law any measure to recognise and introduce same sex marriage. Their frustration is increased by the fact that the Assembly has voted by a majority in favour of same sex marriage, but by reason of special voting arrangements which reflect the troubled past of this State, that majority has not been sufficient to give the vote effect in law.

The Democratic Unionist Party has blocked passage of a law to allow same-sex marriage in Northern Ireland, even though it is recognized in the Irish Republic, England, Scotland and Wales. Law & Religion UK reports on the decision.

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.)

Federal Suit By Houston Employees Seeks To Preserve Benefits For Same-Sex Couples

A suit was filed yesterday in a Texas federal district court by Houston city employees and their same-sex spouses seeking to preserve the same spousal benefits that are received by other city employees. In a decision handed down last month, the Texas Supreme Court kept alive a suit by Houston taxpayers challenging the city's extending spousal benefits to same-sex married couples. (See prior posting.) In the complaint (full text) filed yesterday in Freeman v. Turner, (SD TX, filed 8/10/2017), plaintiffs asked the federal district court to declare that the city may not rely on the Texas DOMA Statute and the Texas Marriage Amendment, which have previously been held unconstitutional by federal courts, to justify depriving city employees with same-sex spouses to to the same spousal benefits extended to other married employees. The complaint also asks the court to find that denial or withdrawal of such benefits would be unconstitutional under the equal protection and due process clauses. Texas Observer reports on the lawsuit.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Ira C. Lupu & Robert W. Tuttle, Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer: Paradigm Lost?, (Forthcoming, American Constitution Society for Law & Policy Supreme Court Review, October Term 2016).
• Meghan Boone, The Autonomy Hierarchy, (Texas Journal on Civil Liberties and Civil Rights, Vol. 22, No. 1, 2016).
• Julio C. Colón, Improving Dispute Resolution for Muslims in the United States, (International Conference on Dispute Resolution 2017: Modern Trends in Effective Dispute Resolution, International Islamic University of Malaysia (2017)).
• Nicholas Aroney, Individual, Community and State: Thoughts on Jane Norton, Freedom of Religious Organizations, (July 17, 2017).
• Adam Perry, Pardons and Mercy, (July 30, 2017).
• Robert L. Tsai, Obama's Conversion on Same-Sex Marriage: The Social Foundations of Individual Rights, (Connecticut Law Review, Vol. 50, 2017).

From SSRN (International and Comparative Law):

• Jaclyn L. Neo, Realizing the Right to Freedom of Thought, Conscience, and Religion: The Limited Normative Force of the ASEAN Human Rights Declaration, (Human Rights Law Review (2017, Forthcoming)).
• Jaclyn L. Neo, Secularism Without Liberalism: Religious Freedom and Secularism in a Non-Liberal State, (Michigan State Law Review, 2017).
• John Lunstroth, Human Rights and Cultural Diversity in UNESCO Bioethics, (in Advancing Global Bioethics, Vol. 6: Religious Perspectives on Bioethics and Human Rights (Tham, Joseph, Man Kwan, Kai, Garcia, Alberto (Eds.) 2017, Springer Nature, New York, Forthcoming).

From SSRN (Jewish Law):

• Raphael Cohen-Almagor, The Monopoly of Jewish Orthodoxy in Israel and Its Effects on the Governance of Religious Diversity, (in Anna Triandafyllidou and Tariq Modood (eds.), The Problem of Religious Diversity (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2017), pp. 250-272).
• Levi Cooper, Mysteries of the Paratext: Why Did Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liady Never Publish His Code of Law?, (Diné Israel 31 (2017): 43-84).

Plaintiffs Awarded Attorneys' Fees In Suit Against County Clerk Kim Davis

In Miller v. Davis, (ED KY, July 21, 2017) a Kentucky federal district court awarded $224,703 in attorney’s fees and costs to plaintiffs who previously obtained a preliminary injunction against Rowan County, Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis.  Davis, citing her religious beliefs, stopped issuing marriage licenses entirely in order to avoid issuing licenses to same-sex couples.  The court yesterday held that plaintiffs were entitled to attorneys' fees because they were the “prevailing party” --they obtained a preliminary injunction that granted the relief they sought. The ultimate dismissal of the case after a change in the law rendered it moot did not change this conclusion.  The court, in a 50-page opinion, said in part:

In this case, the Plaintiffs “prevailed by every measure of victory.” The relief Plaintiffs obtained—the ability to secure marriage licenses and marry—was “preliminary” in name only. It is not the “fleeting” success that fails to establish prevailing-party status.  After the Court obtained compliance with the Preliminary Injunction Orders, Plaintiffs received marriage licenses. And once the plaintiff-couples received their marriage licenses, their rights were not subject to revocation….

... Couples continued to receive marriage licenses after the Kentucky General Assembly amended the law – albeit, on a form Davis felt more comfortable with. Therefore, Plaintiffs’ preliminary-injunction success materially altered their legal relationship with Davis, and that court-ordered change was enduring and irrevocable. Accordingly, the Court concludes that the Plaintiffs “prevailed” within the meaning of § 1988 and are entitled to attorneys’ fees.

The court also held that the state of Kentucky, not Rowan County, is liable for the attorneys’ fees. AP reporting on the decision says Davis plans to appeal, but the state of Kentucky has not yet decided whether it will appeal the ruling. [Thanks to Tom Rutledge for the lead.]

Activist's Suit Argues Gay Pride Flags Are Religious Symbols

The San Diego Union Tribune reported yesterday that anti-gay marriage activist Chris Sevier has filed suit against four members of Congress seeking to force them to remove rainbow flags they have in the hallways outside their Congressional offices.  According to the Union Tribune:

Sevier’s 38-page complaint asks the federal District Court in the District of Columbia to determine that “‘homosexuality’ and other forms of self-asserted sex-based identity narratives are a ‘religion,’” and that the colorful banners are a religious symbol for the “homosexual denomination.” ...

Sevier also asked the court to overturn Supreme Court rulings that ended a prohibition against sodomy and federal policies that only recognized opposite-sex marriages, as well as Obergefell V. Hodges, the 2015 ruling that found that same-sex couples have a fundamental right to marry.

Further, he said the members who displayed the flag should be removed from office.

Sevier has previously lost suits, aimed at discrediting same-sex marriage, in which he challenged state refusals to allow him to marry his laptop. (See prior posting.)