The U.S. Senate on Thursday passed the Matthew Shepard Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007, adding it as an amendment to the 2008 National Defense Authorization Act. The Senate invoked cloture on the amendment by a vote of 60-39, and then passed the amendment by voice vote. The House has already passed the much-debated hate crimes bill as a stand-alone piece of legislation. Friday’s Washington Post described the bill: "the definition of a hate crime would expand to include gender, sexual orientation, gender identity and disability. Local law enforcement officials would be allowed to apply for federal grants to solve such crimes, and federal agents would be given broader authority to assist state and local police. More stringent federal sentencing guidelines would also be instituted."
Conservative Christian groups strongly criticized the Senate’s action. Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, said: "preserving equal justice under the law is more important than scoring points with advocates of homosexual behavior. All violent crimes are hate crimes, and every victim is equally important…. Congress should represent all Americans, not give special protections for some." (Christian Post). In the past, some Christian groups have argued that the bill interferes with their right to preach against homosexual behavior. At a press briefing following the Senate’s action, White House press secretary Dana Perino reiterated the White House’s opposition to the hate crimes bill, but stopped short of repeating previous promises by the President to veto the bill. (See prior posting.)
Objective coverage of church-state and religious liberty developments, with extensive links to primary sources.
Saturday, September 29, 2007
Court Will Decide Part of Buddhist Temple's Claim Against Parent Body
Jodo Shu Betsuin, a Buddhist Temple, was expelled from the Jodo Shu Buddhist sect by the umbrella organization that oversees the sect in North America. The expulsion resulted from an ongoing dispute over who would be the religious leaders of the Temple. After the expulsion, the umbrella organization prohibited the Temple from using its former property. The Temple sued for damages, claiming it was wrongfully evicted, seeking return of furnishings, religious objects and computers in the Temple, and seeking an order dissolving its oral partnership with the umbrella group. In Jodo Shu Betsuin v. Jodoshu North American Buddhist Missions, (Ct App. CA, Sept. 25, 2007), a California Court of Appeals permitted plaintiff to move to trial on two of its three claims.
The court held that adjudicating the eviction claim would unconstitutionally involve the court in determining an ecclesiastical issue—whether the disaffiliation pronouncement was properly reached: "The expulsion resulted from a dispute involving religious leadership. The religious leaders in question had been appointed by Jodo Shu leaders in Japan. The disaffiliation decision was confirmed at the highest levels of the hierarchical religious organization in Japan. The disaffiliation decision necessarily barred plaintiff from use of the temple property…." However the court held that the claims for conversion and partnership dissolution could probably be adjudicated without considering the propriety of the umbrella group’s disaffiliation order. Those claims, it held, created issues that should to go to trial.
Dissenting in part, Judge Mosk said: "If the lease is such that the plaintiff could not be evicted for doctrinal disputes or issues, then a court could determine that there was a wrongful eviction without addressing internal religious matters on the disaffiliation. Thus far, defendants' defense is not justification for the eviction, but rather that there was no valid lease."
The court held that adjudicating the eviction claim would unconstitutionally involve the court in determining an ecclesiastical issue—whether the disaffiliation pronouncement was properly reached: "The expulsion resulted from a dispute involving religious leadership. The religious leaders in question had been appointed by Jodo Shu leaders in Japan. The disaffiliation decision was confirmed at the highest levels of the hierarchical religious organization in Japan. The disaffiliation decision necessarily barred plaintiff from use of the temple property…." However the court held that the claims for conversion and partnership dissolution could probably be adjudicated without considering the propriety of the umbrella group’s disaffiliation order. Those claims, it held, created issues that should to go to trial.
Dissenting in part, Judge Mosk said: "If the lease is such that the plaintiff could not be evicted for doctrinal disputes or issues, then a court could determine that there was a wrongful eviction without addressing internal religious matters on the disaffiliation. Thus far, defendants' defense is not justification for the eviction, but rather that there was no valid lease."
Bureau of Prisons Backs Off Prison Chapel Library Project
Under pressure from religious and civil liberties groups, as well as from the American Library Association, last Wednesday the U.S. Bureau of prisons announced that it would abandon its attempt to create lists of acceptable books on religious topics for prison chapel libraries. The New York Times reported that in an e-mail, the Bureau announced that it would: "begin immediately to return to chapel libraries materials that were removed in June 2007, with the exception of any publications that have been found to be inappropriate, such as material that could be radicalizing or incite violence. The review of all materials in chapel libraries will be completed by the end of January 2008." (See prior related posting.) [Thanks to Melissa Rogers for the lead.]
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Prof Fired For Remarks About Bible Story and Reaction to Student Debate
An adjunct professor at Southwestern Community College in Red Oak, Iowa claims he was terminated last Thursday because of remarks he made about the Bible in class two days earlier. According to the AP, Steve Bitterman says he was fired because he told students that the Biblical story of Adam and Eve is a fairy tale and should not be interpreted literally. However students say they complained as much about his brash style. One student left class crying after Bitterman, in the heat of the debate on the Bible, told her to "pop a Prozac." That student, Kristen Fry, said: "I talked to a lawyer and was told that what he was doing was illegal. He was not allowed to be derogatory toward me for being a Christian. I told my adviser I would sue if I had to." [Thanks to Matthew Caplan for the lead.]
More Prisoner Cases-- Diets, Runestones and Prejudicial Trial Statements
In Nelson v. Miller, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69578 (SD IL, Sept. 20, 2007), a federal Magistrate Judge refused to dismiss a suit brought by a prisoner claiming that the prison chaplain would not allow him to receive a vegan diet for religious reasons, even though other prisoners could do so. Plaintiff is a Roman Catholic who also follows the Rule of St. Benedict which forbids eating the flesh of any four-legged animal.
In Keen v. Noble, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69629 (ED CA, Sept. 20, 2007), a California federal district court refused to dismiss a federal prisoner's complaint that his free exercise rights were violated when prison authorities refused to provide him with runestones for his Asatru religious practices. However the court agreed with a Magistrate's recommendation to dismiss on qualified immunity grounds plaintiff's complaint that he was denied a hof. The court also held that RFRA does not authorize the award of monetary damages.
In Shabazz v. Martin, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70342 (ED MI, Sept. 24, 2007), a Michigan federal district court denied plaintiff prisoner a new trial. Plaintiff had claimed that his defense counsel had made prejudicial comments during trial when, in questioning a witness, he referred to Plaintiff and other leaders of the Nation of Islam as "clerics" and "imams". The court rejected plaintiff's argument that this gave the jury a false impression that his religion was connected with the Sunni or Shiite doctrines in the Middle East.
In Henderson v. Virginia, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70207 (WD VA, Sept. 21, 2007),a Virginia federal district court rejected a prisoner's claim that he was denied participation in the Ramadan fast as retaliation for "a verbal altercation" he had with prison officers. The court found that plaintiff did not show intentional conduct by defendants, did not show a retaliatory motive, and that in fact he was able to fast by saving food from his other meals.
In Conyers v. Abitz, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70322 (ED WI, Sept. 21, 2007), a Muslim inmate was refused participation in the program that gave late meals during Ramadan because he missed the sign-up deadline. the court held that genuine issues of fact exist as to whether the deadline applied to this inmate, whether he had adequate notice of the deadline and whether the prison had a sufficient penological justification to impose the deadline.
In Keen v. Noble, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69629 (ED CA, Sept. 20, 2007), a California federal district court refused to dismiss a federal prisoner's complaint that his free exercise rights were violated when prison authorities refused to provide him with runestones for his Asatru religious practices. However the court agreed with a Magistrate's recommendation to dismiss on qualified immunity grounds plaintiff's complaint that he was denied a hof. The court also held that RFRA does not authorize the award of monetary damages.
In Shabazz v. Martin, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70342 (ED MI, Sept. 24, 2007), a Michigan federal district court denied plaintiff prisoner a new trial. Plaintiff had claimed that his defense counsel had made prejudicial comments during trial when, in questioning a witness, he referred to Plaintiff and other leaders of the Nation of Islam as "clerics" and "imams". The court rejected plaintiff's argument that this gave the jury a false impression that his religion was connected with the Sunni or Shiite doctrines in the Middle East.
In Henderson v. Virginia, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70207 (WD VA, Sept. 21, 2007),a Virginia federal district court rejected a prisoner's claim that he was denied participation in the Ramadan fast as retaliation for "a verbal altercation" he had with prison officers. The court found that plaintiff did not show intentional conduct by defendants, did not show a retaliatory motive, and that in fact he was able to fast by saving food from his other meals.
In Conyers v. Abitz, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70322 (ED WI, Sept. 21, 2007), a Muslim inmate was refused participation in the program that gave late meals during Ramadan because he missed the sign-up deadline. the court held that genuine issues of fact exist as to whether the deadline applied to this inmate, whether he had adequate notice of the deadline and whether the prison had a sufficient penological justification to impose the deadline.
Chicago Dentist Charged With Imposing Scientology On Employees
The EEOC has filed religious discrimination charges against a Chicago dentist, according to WBBM News. The suit claims that dentist James Orrington required ten employees to attend Scientology seminars and watch Scientology videos in order to retain their jobs. Before Orrington would give employees their checks, he demanded they write or recite Scientology formulas to help move them to a higher state of mind. The employees also allege sexual harassment.
Missionary's Bias Claim Dismissed Under Ministerial Exception Rule
A missionary has lost her racial and sexual discrimination suit against her former employer, Africa Inland Mission International, Inc. ("AIM"), challenging her termination in Namibia. In its decision, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70084 (D DC, Sept. 24, 2007), the federal district court for the District of Columbia applied the "ministerial exception" rule to dismiss plaintiff's claim that AIM wanted to turn the property where her home for abused and neglected children was located into a bead and breakfast for Whites. AIM said that plaintiff had been charged with abuse of children and improper sexual behavior. The court said that "Determining whether AIM's termination of [plaintiff] fell within ... contractually-permitted parameters--or whether ... [it] was motivated by other concerns--would involve inquiring into 'a core matter of ecclesiastical self-governance not subject to interference by a state'." The court also rejected defamation, breach of trust, conversion and unjust enrichment claims by plaintiff. [Note: This posting has been modified to eliminate the name of the plaintiff at plaintiff's request.]
Israeli Zionist Rabbis Threaten Split Over Sabbatical Farming Rules
In Israel, disagreements among Orthodox rabbis on whether to recognize a legal loophole that permits Jewish farmers to continue to grow crops on their land during the current Sabbatical year threatens to split the official Chief Rabbinate. Yesterday's Jerusalem Post reports that Tzohar, a group of religious Zionist rabbis, has rebelled against the strict interpretation adopted by the Chief Rabbinate and has announced it will set up an alternative supervisory organization to certify foods grown in Israel by Jewish farmers who have technically "sold" their fields to non-Jews for the Sabbatical year. Many authorities recognize this as a way to get around the religious requirement that Jewish fields in Israel must lie fallow for the year. Recognizing the loophole-- known as heter mechira-- is necessary to prevent many farmers from financial ruin. However, Rabbi Moshe Rauchverger, a member of the Chief Rabbinate's governing council, said that Tzohar's move threatened to break the Chief Rabbinate's monopoly on furnishing religious services. He said, "If Tzohar starts providing kosher supervision, what is to stop Reform and Conservative from doing the same?" (See prior related posting.)
Sheriff Violates Establishment Clause By Inviting Christian Speakers
Yesterday in Milwaukee Deputy Sheriffs Association v. Clarke, (ED WI, Sept. 25, 2007), a Wisconsin federal district court held that Milwaukee County Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. violated the Establishment Clause when he invited the Fellowship of Christian Centurions to make presentations at the Department's leadership conference and at Department "roll calls" at the beginning of each work shift. Two deputies, a Catholic and a Muslim, who were made uncomfortable by the presentations objected and eventually filed suit seeking damages and an injunction. Federal judge Lynn Adelman wrote:
defendants invited representatives of a Christian organization to present a proselytizing Christian message to deputies at meetings held at the workplace during working hours, which deputies were required to attend, and conveyed a message of endorsement of the presentations. The effect of defendants’ actions was to promote religion and to do so coercively.A hearing has been set for November to discuss remedies. Yesterday's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports on the case.
Hillary Clinton Emphasizing Liberal Religious Tradition In Her Campaign
An article in yesterday's Washington Post explores Hillary Clinton's use of religion in her campaign for the presidential nomination. It points out that Clinton's outreach to religious voters that have been alienated from the Democratic party combines moralism with her social liberalism. It comments: "In a nation obsessed by the influence of religious conservatives, it is easy to forget that liberal Protestants were once the dominant cultural influence in America."
Today Is "See You at the Pole" Event At Schools
CBN News reports that this morning around the country school students are taking part in before-school prayer at the annual See You at the Pole event. Held on the the fourth Wednesday of every September, organizers describe SYATP as "a student-initiated, student organized, and student-led event. That means this is all about students meeting at their school flagpole to pray—for their school, friends teachers, government, and their nation." The National Network of Youth Ministries coordinates the event. (SYATP website). Last year about 2 million students at over 50,000 schools participated.
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Former FLDS Leader Jeffs Convicted Of Being Rape Accomplice
A Washington County, Utah state court jury today convicted Warren Jeffs, former head of the polygamist Fundamentalist Church of Latter Day Saints, of being an accomplice to the rape of a 14 year old girl who was pressured by Jeffs to enter into a marriage with her 19-year old cousin. The New York Times reports that "the verdict ... was a vindication of the prosecution’s argument — which some experts had thought might be hard to accept — that orchestrating a marriage of a young girl under duress made Mr. Jeffs culpable even though he was not present when the rape occurred." Prosecutors argued that Jeffs knew that the marriage would lead to non-consensual sexual relationships.
The Los Angeles Times last week filled out the details: "Jeffs pressured the girl into marriage, then refused to free her when she complained that her husband was touching her in ways she did not like." Jeffs' attorney, Walter F. Bugden Jr., had argued: "The state can say Warren Steed Jeffs is on trial, but it's his . . . church, his religious beliefs that is on trial here, dressed up as a crime called rape." He argued that the state should have charged Jeffs only with officiating at an unlawful marriage.
The Los Angeles Times last week filled out the details: "Jeffs pressured the girl into marriage, then refused to free her when she complained that her husband was touching her in ways she did not like." Jeffs' attorney, Walter F. Bugden Jr., had argued: "The state can say Warren Steed Jeffs is on trial, but it's his . . . church, his religious beliefs that is on trial here, dressed up as a crime called rape." He argued that the state should have charged Jeffs only with officiating at an unlawful marriage.
Police Officer Has Partial Win In Attempt To Wear Cross Lapel Pin On his Uniform
Risk v. Burgettstown Borough, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70048 (WD PA, Sept. 21, 2007) involved religious discrimination and retaliatory discharge claims by a part-time Pennsylvania police officer who was ordered to stop wearing a small cross lapel pin on his uniform. A Pennsylvania federal district court dismissed plaintiff's First amendment speech and religion claims, but permitted plaintiff to move ahead with employment discrimination claims under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the PHRA, Pennsylvania's comparable anti-discrimination law.
In Compromise, Israel Appoints 19 New Rabbinic Court Judges
YNet News reports that after four years of political maneuvering and litigation, 19 new judges have been appointed by the Justice Department to Israel's religious court. The appointees were chosen by a special committee set up by Justice Minister Daniel Friedmann. A compromise has gotten 5 of the 19 new judges to come from the national religious sector, instead of all appointees being strictly Orthodox. Seven of the 15 Orthodox appointees are Sephardic Jews. Women's groups were still unhappy with the appointments, saying they merely solidify the hold of the Orthodox community which advocates patriarchal rules regarding divorce. (See prior related posting.) Haaretz also reports on the appointments.
Plaintiff Suing Military Is Being Harassed
The Navy Times today reports that Spc. Jeremy Hall who recently filed a lawsuit against the military claiming he was threatened by an Army major for holding a meeting of non-Christians and atheists in Iraq now says that he is personally being harassed. E-mails from Hall to Mikey Weinstein, founder of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, say that Hall has been threatened on blogs with being killed by friendly fire for filing the lawsuit. Meanwhile, Lt. Col. James Hutton, a spokesman for the U.S.-led multinational force in Iraq, said that the Major alleged to have been involved in the incident leading to Hall's lawsuit-- Paul Welbourne-- cannot be located by the Army.
UPDATE: Truthout reports that Military Religious Freedom Foundation researchers have identified the Major at the center of Hall's lawsuit. His correct name is Freddy J. Welborn. He was found through his MySpace page. The complaint in the lawsuit will be amended and refiled to reflect the correct name.
UPDATE: Truthout reports that Military Religious Freedom Foundation researchers have identified the Major at the center of Hall's lawsuit. His correct name is Freddy J. Welborn. He was found through his MySpace page. The complaint in the lawsuit will be amended and refiled to reflect the correct name.
Connecticut City Will Lend Textbooks To Non-Public Schools
On Monday, Manchester, Connecticut's Board of Education voted 7-2 to spend $50,000 on a program to lend textbooks to non-public schools. Today's Journal Inquirer reports that the issue has been discussed for more than a year. Only books currently in use in public schools will be available for loan, although state law permits a broader list to be made available. Board member Steven "Moose" Edwards said that nonpublic schools already receive over $700,000 per year in assistance for transportation, food services and social workers.
School's Decision To Exclude Religious Music From Graduation Upheld
Last week in Nurre v. Whitehead, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70049 (WD WA, Sept. 20, 2007), a Washington federal district court rejected a complaint by a student member of a high school wind ensemble that his constitutional rights were violated when school officials rejected the Ensemble's decision to play Franz Biebl's instrumental arrangement of "Ave Maria" at the 2006 Jackson High School graduation ceremony in Everett, Washington. Officials decided that all religious music should be kept out of graduation. The court rejected plaintiff's First Amendment speech claim, as well as her Establishment Clause and Equal Protection claims. The court held that the Ensemble's performance of "Ave Maria" at graduation would have borne the imprimatur of the school, and the state therefore had an interest in preventing possible Establishment Clause problems that would arise if the musical piece had been permitted.
UPDATE: Here is the full opinion in a non-proprietary database, thanks to Alliance Alert. And here is a recording of Biebl's version of the hymn via YouTube.
UPDATE: Here is the full opinion in a non-proprietary database, thanks to Alliance Alert. And here is a recording of Biebl's version of the hymn via YouTube.
Monday, September 24, 2007
California Church Keeps Exempt Status; Questions IRS Conclusions
All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena, California earlier this month received a letter from the Internal Revenue Service informing it that its non-profit status would be continued. The letter (full text) said, however, that a 2004 sermon constituted improper interference in a Presidential campaign. The letter said that this appears to be a one-time occurrence and that the Church now has policies in place to prevent future problems. According to Episcopal News Service yesterday, parish leadership has asked the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration to furnish an explanation of why the sermon was found to be a problem and also to look into allegations that IRS officials may have breached the Church's privacy rights in conversations with high Justice Department officials. The Church is concerned that the IRS exam may have been triggered by partisan political considerations. (See prior related posting.)
A Flood of New Scholarly Publications In Law and Religion
From SSRN:
- Ali L. Khan, Advocacy Under Islam and Common Law, (August 2007).
- John Witte, Go Ye, Therefore, and Make Disciples of All Nations': Proselytism in the New World Order, (2007).
- John Witte, Rights, Resistance, and Revolution: The Protestant Foundations of Rights and Revolution, (2007).
- Edward A. Hartnett, Catholic Judges and Cooperation in Sin, (University of St. Thomas Law Journal, Vol. 4, No. 2, 2006).
- Charles J. Reid, Children and the Right to Life in the Canon Law and the Magisterium of the Catholic Church: 1878 to the Present, BEST LOVE OF THE CHILD, Timothy Jackson, (ed.), 2008.
- Charles J. Reid, The Rights of Children in Medieval Canon Law, (U. of St. Thomas Legal Studies Research Paper No. 07-34, 2007).
- Marie Ashe, Beyond Nomos and Narrative: Unconverted Antinomianism in the Work of Susan Howe, (Yale Journal of Law & Feminism, Vol. 18, No. 1, 2006).
- Peter Radan, From Dayton to Dover: The Legacy of the Scopes Trial, (Macquarie Law Working Paper No. 2007-6, September, 2007).
- Mark Strasser, Establishing the Pledge: On Coercion, Endorsement, and the Marsh Wild Card, 40 Indiana Law Review 529-583 (2007).
- Stephen E. Young & Alison Shea, Separating State From Church: A Research Guide to the Law of the Vatican City State, 99 Law Library Journal 589-610 (2007).
- Program on Law and State Government Fellowship Symposium: From the State House to the Schoolhouse: Religious Expression in the Public Sphere. Introduction by Cynthia A. Baker; articles by Kevin C. McDowell and Luke Meier. 40 Indiana Law Review 491-528 (2007).
New book:
- Alan Dershowitz, Blasphemy: How the Religious Right Is Hijacking Our Declaration of Independence, (John Wiley and Sons, June 2007), reviewed in the Jewish Standard.
Indianapolis Airport Foot Washing Sink Creates Religious Controversy
In Indianapolis, Indiana, International Airport officials are proposing to install a foot-washing sink that would be used primarily by Muslims before prayer. Yesterday The Indy Channel reported that Rev. Jerry Hillenburg of Indianapolis' Hope Baptist Church has raised a biblical and constitutional challenge to the proposal. He argues that the proposal involves use of tax funds to promote one religion. Airport officials say the issue is one of safety and health. Over 100 Muslim taxi drivers currently use a traditional sink at the airport, creating problems by leaving the floor wet.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)