School Board Wants Private Funds To Defend Jesus Painting

The Harrison County, West Virginia school board has agreed to defend the painting of Jesus at Bridgeport High School only if it can find non-government sources for the $150,000 anticipated cost of litigation before the Board's next meeting on August 25. Friday's State Journal reports that school board member Mike Queen, acting as a private citizen, is heading up the fundraising effort. In June, Americans United brought suit to challenge the painting that has been hanging in the school for at least 30 years. (See prior posting.)

Malaysia Ruling On Jurisdiction In Mixed Family Law Issue

Malaysia's Civil High Court in Kuala Lumpur has handed down a decision resolving one of the complexities stemming from the vesting jurisdiction over Islamic family law issues in Syariah courts., but jurisdiction of non-Muslim family law matters in civil courts. (Background.) On Friday, Sun2Surf reported on the case in which a Civil High Court ruled that it has jurisdiction over a complex custody matter. Aishah Abdullah is the mother of two children born out of wedlock. After the children were born, Aishah converted to Islam, but did not have her children converted. Since neither of the children (nor their father) is Muslim, Syariah courts would not have jurisdiction over the custody claim.

RFRA Challenge To FAA Approval Of O'Hare Expansion Rejected

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals today, in a case based on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, eliminated a major hurdle that had been in the way of the expansion of Chicago's O'Hare Airport. In Village of Bensenville v. Federal Aviation Commission, (DC Cir., Aug. 4, 2006), the court rejected a petition challenging the Federal Aviation Administration's approval of an airport layout plan-- a necessary step in obtaining federal funding. The approved plan involved relocating the remains of those buried in a nearby cemetery. Members of a church that owned the cemetery and descendents of those buried in it argued that moving the remains would substantially burden their religious exercise because of their belief in the physical resurrection of the bodies of Christian believers. Relying on RFRA, the challengers insisted that the FAA was required by RFRA to show that the plan they approved was the least restrictive means of meeting the government’s compelling interests in reducing airport delay and enhancing airport capacity.

In a 2-1 decision, the majority held that the expansion plan that will impact the cemetery was developed and will be implemented by the city of Chicago. RFRA applies only to the federal government, not to state and local government action. FAA approval does not turn the city's implementation into into federal action. Judge Griffith dissenting argued that FAA approval of a plan that it screened, studied, chose and modified is enough to require the FAA to comply with RFRA.

In addition, the court the court unanimously held that it lacked jurisdiction to consider a challenge to the FAA letter expressing a nonbinding intention to obligate federal funding for O'Hare's expansion because the letter was not a final order.

The Chicago Tribune covers the court's decision. It explains that additional litigation remains. A suit now before the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, among other things, is challenging a 2003 Illinois law that specifically exempted the cemeteries involved from the state's Religious Freedom Restoration Act. (See prior posting.)

Wiccan Veteran's Widow Asks Americans United For Help

Roberta Stewart, whose husband was killed when the military helicopter he was in was shot down over Afghanistan, has now asked Americans United For Separation of Church and State to assist her in her long struggle to get the Department of Veterans Affairs to approve placing a Wiccan symbol on her husband's grave marker in a veteran's cemetery. The Reno(NV) Gazette-Journal today reports that AU assistant legal director Richard Katskee says this is a situation in which the government, which has approved emblems for 38 other religions, is playing favorites. AU will first try to resolve the issue by negotiations, but will file suit if that does not work. Veterans Administration spokesman Matthew Burns said that his department has merely "deferred a decision on this application until [it] completes its efforts to develop a uniform set of rules by which all applications can be considered." (See prior posting.)

More Anti-Conversion Legislation In India

The battle over anti-conversion laws in India goes on. Now the Chhattisgarh state legislature has voted to enact a law requiring official approval for any religious conversion. However, in order to facilitate the reconversion of Christians to Hinduism, the bill provides that "returning to one's forefather's religion or his original religion will not be treated as conversion." BBC News today reports that Christian groups are reacting strongly against the bill and hope to persuade the governor to refuse to sign it. (See prior related posting.)

Korean Evangelicals Sent Home From Afghanistan

The Middle East Times reports today that Afghanistan has begun to deport 600 South Korean Christians who had recently come to the country, out of fear for their safety. Their visit was sponsored by the Institute of Asian Culture and Development, and was undertaken despite warnings against it from the South Korean government. Afghan authorities claimed the group had come to attempt to convert Muslims to Christianity, and Muslim clerics had begun to speak out against them. South Korean Christians are known for aggressive evangelism in Muslim countries. Here is another report on the story from Radio Free Europe, emphasizing the group's denials that they were planning conversionary activities. They were trying to organize a "peace festival" that would include a medical conference and two soccer games.

Senate Hearings On Bill To Deny Attorneys' Fees In Establishment Clause Cases

On Wednesday, a subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee held hearings on the Public Expressions of Religion Act, S.3696, a bill that would preclude the award of attorneys' fees in Establishment Clause cases. The Senate bill explicitly refers to a number of high profile kinds of cases as being among those covered. The language would assure that plaintiffs could not recover attorneys' fees in challenging the Mt. Soledad cross , "In God We Trust" on coins and currency, the Ten Commandments in federal buildings, and government chartering or aid to the Boy Scouts. Sen. Sam Brownback, who sponsored the bill, issued this release on the hearings. The American Legion testified in favor of the bill, while in a release, Americans United opposed its passage.

FLDS Member Gets Light Sentence In Polygamous Sex Charges

Court TV reports that on Wednesday, an Arizona judge sentenced polygamist Kelly Fischer to only 45 days in jail for having sexual relations with a teenager that he took as his third wife. He will also be on probation for 3 years and will be required to register as a sex offender. A member of the FLDS church that encourages polygamy, Fischer is the first of 7 to be tried for polygamous marriages to minors. The judge told Fischer that his religious beliefs do not justify his violating the law. The woman involved, now 21, refused to cooperate with the prosecution and supported Fisher.

Federal Court Hears Arguments On Sectarian City Council Prayer

In Richmond, Virginia on Thursday, a federal district judge heard arguments on summary judgment motions in a case in which a Fredericksburg City Council member is challenging Council policy that does not let him invoke the name of Jesus Christ when he offers an opening prayer at council meetings. The Associated Press reports that Judge James R. Spencer suggested he was not convinced by the First Amendment arguments raised by council member Hashmel Turner's lawyer. Judge Spencer told the lawyer that all of the case law was against him. (See prior posting.)

Recently Available Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Chambers v. Steed, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52920 (D. Kan., July 25, 2006), a Kansas federal district court rejected a prisoner's claim that his rights were violated because his segregated confinement prevented him from attending Friday prayer services.

In Andreola v. Wisconsin, 2006 U.S. Dist LEXIS 52968 (ED Wis., July 19, 2006), a Wisconsin federal district court held that federal law precludes the award of compensatory damages in RLUIPA claims by prisoners alleging merely mental or emotional injury. However the court refused to grant defendants summary judgment on a punitive damages claim. The decision came in a long-running suit in which a prisoner alleged that he was denied a kosher diet while incarcerated. In Magistrate Judge P.A. v. Miami-Dade County, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52595 (SD Fla., May 16, 2006), a Florida federal district court similarly held that, despite 42 USC 1997e(e), nominal and punitive damages may be recovered for free exercise violations, even though there are no physical injuries from the violations.

In Martinez v. Ortiz, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52350 (D. Colo., July 31, 2006), a Colorado federal district court permitted a Native American prisoner to proceed with a claim for injunctive relief, but not for monetary relief, in his free exercise claim stemming from limitations placed on his religious practices.

In Madison v. Kilbourne, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52994 (WD Va., July 18, 2006), a Virginia federal district court rejected an inmate's claims that he was denied his rights under the First Amendment and RLUIPA when on one day prison authorities denied him two kosher meals.

Officials Are Trying To Correct Tax Sale Of St. Louis Synagogue

In St. Louis, tax officials are in court today asking a judge to undo the sale at auction of a $4.5 million synagogue building-- Central Reform Congregation-- for $11,800. The problem arose because the synagogue owed a little over $4000 in back taxes on a house it had bought next door to the synagogue. The properties were combined on tax records because the synagogue failed to apply for a separate tax exemption for the synagogue building. So a dispute over taxes on the house subjected the entire property to a tax lien. Yesterday's St. Louis Post Dispatch gives details.

Pedophile Claims Free Exercise Protections

In Cleveland, Ohio yesterday, a man charged with sexually assaulting nine boys who have physical or mental disabilities argued in court that his activities were protected by the First Amendment's free exercise clause. According to the Associated Press, Phillip Distasio, who admits he is a pedophile, says he is the leader of a church called the Arcadian Field Ministries. He says having sex with children is a sacred ritual of his church. Distasio made the argument himself after his court-appointed lawyer refused to put forward a First Amendment defense.

Las Vegas Sued Over Ban On Feeding Homeless

In Las Vegas, Nevada yesterday, the ACLU of Nevada filed suit challenging an ordinance passed July 19 that prohibits "providing food or meals to the indigent for free or for a nominal fee" in any city park. The complaint alleges, according to the Associated Press, that the statute violates the First and 14th Amendments, including the rights to freedom of speech and free exercise of religion.

Canadian Muslim Claims Religious Right To Install Satellite Dish For Condo

In Halifax. Nova Scotia on Tuesday, a Human Rights Board of Inquiry held a hearing on a complaint by a Muslim condominium owner who claims religious discrimination because condo rules do not permit him to keep a satellite dish that he installed for religious reasons. Wednesday's Halifax Daily News reports that Ahmed Assal was told by the condo managers that he could not install a dish that picks up 18 Arabic channels from the Middle East. Assal wanted the satellite dish so he could to teach his three children about their religion, language, culture and traditions. One of the managers told him that satellite dishes were not permitted under the condominium bylaws and that a dish could damage the roof. After 21 months, Assal moved ahead and installed a dish on a tree in his backyard. He says that the condo board has granted exceptions to various rules for other owners. But the managers say those other owners, unlike Assal, made formal requests for rule waivers.

Pennsylvania Zoning Ordinance Challenged By Church

Liberty Counsel has filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of the Lighthouse Christian Center against the city of Titusville, Pennsylvania, challenging the city's zoning ordinances that exclude churches from commercial areas and only permit them in areas zoned residential. CNSNews.com reported yesterday that the lawsuit alleges that the "church-free" zoning rule violates the federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act.

Nigerian State Claims Sharia Legal System Is A Success

On Wednesday, the Nigerian paper This Day carried a long article on the success of the Sharia legal system that has been operating for seven years in the Nigerian state of Zamfara. Government officials claim the following achievements for the system: "Institutionalization of equity and justice in the conduct of government business, reduction of crime rate at all levels of society, greater respect for human rights and the entrenchment of such rights, greater awareness of Islamic teachings and practices by the citizens of the state, ... [and] the curtailing of alcoholism and prostitution which led to the closure of 2, 800 brothels and beer palours. Similarly, cinema houses were outlawed and were subsequently purchased from the owners and converted to offices or learning centres." Also fears that non-Muslims would disinvest did not materialize.

Christian Rock Band Loses Suit Against School That Canceled Concert

In a case decided Tuesday by a federal district judge in Toledo, Ohio, the court rejected First Amendment and Equal Protection claims by a Christian rock band whose planned concert at Rossford (Ohio) High School was cancelled out of concern that it might violate the Establishment Clause. In Golden v. Rossford Exempted Village School District, Case 3:05-cv-7052 (ND Ohio, July 31, 2006), the court held that "a student assembly, held during school hours, with only one musical performer approved by the Principal, bears the imprimatur of the School." Therefore, it said, the school was entitled to exercise editorial control over the performance. Cases involving requirements of viewpoint neutrality, the court said, do not apply where the state creates no forum for speech.

The court also rejected the band's claim that it was discriminated against because of its religious identity, in violation of the equal protection clause. The court said, "Where speech is government speech, the government is entitled to exercise control over its presentation... Defendants were entitled to discriminate against Plaintiffs because of their Christian religious identity precisely because the assembly audience might associate that identity with the School...." Moreover, the court said, avoiding a potential Establishment Clause violation is a compelling interest that overcomes any equal protection objection.

Here is the full text of Plaintiff's and Defendant's motions for summary judgment. Today's Toledo Blade covers the case, reporting that plaintiffs say they will take the case to the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals.

UPDATE: The full opinion is available online thanks to How Appealing.

Moderates Will Regain Control Of Kansas School Board

The Kansas City Star reports that in yesterday's Kansas State Board of Education primary election, it appears that two moderate Republicans who favor teaching a conventional science curriculum have defeated two current conservative board members who favor teaching of intelligent design. Five board seats were at issue. In the other three races, incumbents (2 conservative Republicans and one moderate Democrat) held onto their seats. These results assure that moderates will win a majority on the Board in the November general election. Last year by a 6-4 vote, the conservative majority on the Board adopted science standards that favor teaching approaches that are critical of evolution. Here are the official results from the Kansas Secretary of State's office.

RLUIPA Claim and Constitutionality Upheld By 9th Circuit

Yesterday in Guru Nanak Sikh Society of Yuba City v. County of Sutter, (9th Cir., Aug. 1, 2006), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ordered Sutter County, California to issue a Sikh temple a conditional use permit to permit the construction of a temple on a parcel of land zoned as "agricultural". The county had denied permits twice, under conditions that significantly lessened the prospect that the group would be able to find any acceptable location. The court found that the county thereby imposed a substantial burden on Guru Nanak's exercise of religion in violation of RLUIPA. The Court also held that RLUIPA's religious land use provisions are a constitutional exercise of Congress' powers to enforce the 14th Amendment, saying "RLUIPA is a congruent and proportional response to free exercise violations because it targets only regulations that are susceptible, and have been shown, to violate individuals’ religious exercise." Today's Marysville-Yuba City Appeal Democrat covers the decision. [Thanks to Anthony Picarello via Religionlaw listserv for the information.]

Senate Passes Mt. Soledad Cross Bill Giving Title To U.S.

By unanimous consent on Tuesday, the U.S. Senate approved the bill-- previously passed by the House-- to transfer to federal control the land on which the Mount Soledad war memorial cross stands. Yesterday's San Diego Union-Tribune reports on the Senate's quick action, and says that President Bush is expected to sign the law. Under the bill, the Department of Defense will manage the monument and the private Mount Soledad Memorial Association will continue to maintain it. Federal courts have ordered the cross removed, finding that it violates California's constitution. Proponents argue that the federal government has greater leeway. And while a federal court has found the cross to be a violation of the California Constitution and a state court has held that it would be a violation of the California Constitution for San Diego to transfer the cross to the United States, this new bill has the United States take title without the city taking any action to transfer it. Last month, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy issued a stay of the lower federal court's order to remove the cross, pending final adjudication of pending appeals. [CORRECTED]