Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Seymore v. Joslyn, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32545 (ND NY, April 14, 2009), a New York federal district judge rejected a prisoner's claim that a corrections officer retaliated against him for being a Muslim by suggesting that plaintiff fantasizes about having a homosexual relationship with a male corrections employee.

In Eagle v. Gilbert, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32976 (ED MI, April 17, 2009), a Michigan federal district court accepted a magistrate's recommendation that an inmate's lawsuit alleging he was prevented from attending Sunday religious services in prison be dismissed. The magistrate's conclusion was based on plaintiff's failure to exhaust administrative remedies in complaining that he was assigned to a Sunday morning work detail that interfered with Protestant services.

In Wakefield v. Indermill, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32909 (ED CA, April 6, 2009), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed, with leave to file an amended complaint, a lawsuit brought by a Seventh Day Adventist inmate against a Protestant prison chaplain. The court said plaintiff had not adequately alleged that defendant's refusal to provide him with weekly holy communion and foot washing deprived him of a reasonable opportunity to practice his faith or substantially burdened his free exercise.

In Mello v. Martinez, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32878 (ED CA, April 6, 2009), a California federal magistrate judge permitted an inmate to proceed with his free exercise and RLUIPA claims. Plaintiff alleged that two corrections officers destroyed his religious artifacts that are essential to most of his Native American religious ceremonies.

In Zargary v. City of New York, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33240 (SD NY, April 20, 2009), a New York federal district court rejected a free exercise claim by an Orthodox Jewish woman who objected to being required to briefly remove her headscarf, worn for religious reasons, while her identification photo was taken upon admission to a state correctional facility.

In Kuperman v. Comm'r, New Hampshire Dept. of Corrections, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33701(D NH, April 20, 2009), a New Hampshire federal district court accepted a magistrate's recommendation (2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33702 (April 7, 2009)) to permit an Orthodox Jewish inmate to proceed with his free exercise, RLUIPA and equal protection claims. At issue was the decision of prison authorities to deny plaintiff a waiver to grow his beard for religious reasons longer than one-quarter inch. However claims against certain of the defendants were dismissed.

In Nyholm v. Pryce, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34223 (D NJ, April 20, 2009), a New Jersey federal district court permitted an inmate to move ahead with his claim that his free exercise rights were infringed when he was prohibited from attending religious services during his confinement in administrative segregation.

In Scott v. Tilton, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34533 (ED CA, April 7, 2009), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed with leave to file an amended complaint an inmate's claim that prison authorities destroyed or donated four religious cassettes that were sent to him, instead of allowing him to retrieve them.

School Board Grants Uniform Exemption On Religious Grounds For 2nd Grader

The Irving, Texas school board this week, by a vote of 6-1, reversed the decision of an elementary school principal and granted a mother's request that her 7-year old daughter be allowed to wear her shirt untucked for religious reasons. Thursday's Dallas Morning News reported that Dyker Neyland says her second grader needs to wear her shirt tail out to comply with the Biblical requirement for modest dress found in 1 Timothy 2:9. The school's rule is part of its dress requirement for students. Before the vote, Neyland told the Board that she thought she was "being persecuted for being a Christian." [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Attempt Is Being Made To Re-Create Aryan Nations Headquarters In Idaho

Today's Salt Lake Tribune reports that two men in Cour d'Alene, Idaho are attempting to re-create a headquarters for the white separatist, anti-Semitic group, Aryan Nations, there. Apparently the election of Barack Obama is the catalyst for the new try which so far seems to have little support. The first Aryan Nations group that had been headquartered in Cour d'Alene was put out of business after the Southern Poverty Law Center in 2000 obtained a $6.3 million judgment against it on behalf of two residents who were shot by the group's security guards. Aryan Nations leader Richard Butler was forced to declare bankruptcy. Later the group's compound was leveled and turned into a peace park. Aryan Nations was an outgrowth of the Christian Identity movement, and the Idaho group still calls itself "Church of Jesus Christ Christian" on its website.

DC Circuit Again Says GITMO Detainees Not Covered By RFRA

In Rasul v. Myers, (DC Cir., April 24, 2009), the DC Circuit Court of Appeals reaffirmed its earlier holding that Guantanamo detainees cannot bring an action under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to challenge alleged religious harassment at GITMO. The detainees alleged abuses such as denial of a Qu'ran and prayer mats, throwing a copy of the Qur'an into a toilet and forced shaving of their beards. The U.S. Supreme Court had remanded the case to the 9th Circuit for reconsideration in light of intervening Supreme Court precedent. (See prior posting.) Now, in a 2-1 decision, the DC Circuit concludes that non-resident aliens are not protected "persons" under RFRA. Judge Brown, writing a concurring opinion, took a different approach. She concludes that a literal application of RFRA's language would cover plaintiffs, but that this was clearly inconsistent with Congress' broader intent in enacting RFRA. She rejected the narrow definition of "person" put forward by the majority, but wrote:

Accepting plaintiffs' argument that RFRA imports the entire Free Exercise Clause edifice into the military detention context would revolutionize the treatment of captured combatants in a way Congress did not contemplate. In drafting RFRA, Congress was not focused on how to accommodate the important values of religious toleration in the military detention setting. If Congress had focused specifically on this challenge, it would undoubtedly have struck a different balance: somewhere between making government officials' wallets available to every detainee not afforded the full panoply of free exercise rights and declaring those in our custody are not "persons." It would not have created a RFRA-like damage remedy, but it likely would have prohibited, subject to appropriate exceptions, unnecessarily degrading acts of religious humiliation. It would have sought to deter such acts not by compensating the victims, but by punishing the perpetrators or through other administrative measures….

In 2000, when Congress amended RFRA, jihad was not a prominent part of our vocabulary and prolonged military detentions of alleged enemy combatants were not part of our consciousness. They are now. Congress should revisit RFRA with these circumstances in mind.

CNN yesterday reported on the decision.

Islamic Parties Lose Support In Indonesian Parliamentary Election

According to a front-page article in today's New York Times, in Indonesian parliamentary elections held earlier this month, Islamic parties that focused on religious issues suffered a drop in support. They received 26% of the vote, compared to 38% in 2004. Though official results are not yet out, polling and partial results show backing for secular parties, even as the historically moderate Muslims in Indonesia are growing more attached to Islam in their private lives.

Group Announces Campaign To Encourage Graduation Prayer

Now that graduation season is upon us, Liberty Counsel this week announced its annual "Friend or Foe" Graduation Prayer Campaign. It says it is "seeking to educate and, if necessary, litigate to ensure that prayer and religious viewpoints are not suppressed during public school graduation ceremonies." It is distributing its legal memorandum on the issue, suggesting student messages, student or outside speakers selected by religion-neutral criteria, or privately-sponsored graduation ceremonies as techniques that can be used, though most of them do not insure that the speaker will present a prayer.

Lawsuit Filed Over Control of Ft. Worth Episcopal Diocese

The controversy between two groups, both claiming to be the Episcopal Diocese of Ft. Worth (TX) (see prior posting), has not surprisingly now found its way into court. The Ft. Worth Star-Telegram reported this week on a lawsuit filed by the reorganized diocese that remains loyal to the Episcopal Church USA against a break-away group that has affiliated with the more conservative Anglican Province of the Southern Cone. The complaint (full text) filed in Tarrant County District Court last week seeks a declaration that plaintiffs are the proper authorities entitled to control and use Diocese property, including the name, seal and other intellectual property of the Diocese. It asks the court to order defendants to vacate the Diocese's real property and seeks an accounting. It also asks for recognition of trustees elected by plaintiff as the proper trustees of the Diocesan Corporation.

Suit Charges Texas AG's Office With Religious Discrimination

Texas Lawyer reports that earlier this month the former appellate section chief in the Texas Attorney General's Child Support Division filed a religious discrimination lawsuit against the AG's office. She claims that Good Friday gets preferential treatment over Jewish holidays. Texas Government Code §662.003(c) and 662.006 provide that state employees may take a paid day off for Rosh Hashana, Yom Kippur or Good Friday, (defined as "optional holidays") but must give up a state holiday during the same fiscal year to make up for it. Plaintiff Rhonda Pressley claims that the AG's office permits employees to take Good Friday afternoon-- but not Jewish holidays-- off without making the time up on another holiday. Her complaint alleges that she was terminated either because she complained to the EEOC about this religious discrimination and/or because she complained that her supervisor favored male employees. The AG's office says that Pressley was terminated for unprofessional conduct.

Iowa Recorders Are Told They Must Issue Same-Sex Marriage Licenses

According to yesterday's Gay & Lesbian Times, now that the Iowa Supreme Court has legalized same-sex marriage in the state (see prior posting), Victoria Hutton of the Iowa Department of Public Health has notified all 99 county recorders that they must issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Some of the recorders have religious objections to doing so. Meanwhile yesterday's Des Moines Register reports that Iowa magistrate Francis Honrath has decided he will stop performing all marriage ceremonies. A number of other judges and court officials are expected to take similar stands.

Malaysia Will Bar Conversion of Children Where One Spouse Changes Religion

Islam Online reports that the government of Malaysia yesterday decided that civil marriage laws and other laws should be amended to require that children be raised in the religion that both their parents shared at the time of their marriage. If one spouse converts after the marriage, he or she will not have the right to have the children converted as well. To the extent this will require changes in Islamic law, the issue will be brought to the attention of the Sultans who are in charge of religious affairs. The issue has come up in a recent high profile case in which a Hindu husband converted to Islam and then apparently converted the children as well without the consent of his still-Hindu wife. The wife is suing for custody of the children.

UPDATE: Reaction to the government's decision has been swift. Friday's Malaysia's Star reports that the High Court in Ipoh handed down an initial ruling in the case of the Hindu wife that triggered much of the concern. The court granted M. Indira Gandhi interim custody of her three children and an injunction preventing her husband from entering their home.

Meanwhile, a debate on the constitutionality of the government's decision began. Friday's Bernama reports that the director of the Department of Islamic Development Malaysia says the proposal is inconsistent with Article 12(4) of the Constitution that provides: "the religion of a person under the age of eighteen years shall be decided by his parent or guardian." He emphasizes that the Constitutional language refers to "parent" in the singular. On the other side, Malaysia Today argues that the government's position is constitutional, pointing out that the Eleventh Schedule to the Constitution on interpretive principles provides that "words in the singular include the plural, and words in the plural include the singular."

UPDATE 2: On May 6, PTI reported that a High Court judge granted an interim stay of the order that gave Ghandhi interim custody of her children. The husband claimed the civil court lacks jurisdiction and that he has a custody order issued by a Shariah court. The husband has been evading service of the civil court's interim custody order, and a motion to hold him in contempt is pending.

Nomination of Creationist As Texas Board of Education Chair Is In Trouble

Texas State Board of Education Chairman Don McLeroy was elevated from board member to his chairmanship position as an interim appointment by Gov. Rick Perry in the summer of 2007. Now, finally, the Texas Senate is holding hearings on whether to ratify his nomination to the chairmanship. (Eye on Williamson). The Austin Statesman reports that McLeroy faced "searing questioning" by the Senate Nominations Committee on Wednesday. Sen. Eliot Shapleigh says that McLeroy has used his chairmanship to promote his religious views on issues such as Bible course curriculum, language arts instruction and science standards.

The Houston Chronicle reports that McLeroy, a dentist, admits he is a "young earth Creationist" who believes the earth is about 6000 year old. However McLeroy says he has not pushed his viewpoints into educational policy and that the recently adopted science curriculum standards were not religious. (See prior posting.) McLeroy needs 21 votes from the 31-member Texas Senate for confirmation. It is unclear whether he will be able to get that amount of support. Nominations Chairman Mike Jackson said he will not move ahead on the Senate floor with the nomination if it looks like it would not pass. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Connecticut Law Implements Same-Sex Marriage Ruling With Exemptions For Religious Organziations

Yesterday Connecticut Governor M. Jodi Rell signed S.B. No. 899, a bill to implement the state Supreme Court's 2008 decision validating same-sex marriages. (AP). The bill also recognizes same-sex civil unions from other states and merges Connecticut civil unions into marriages. On Wednesday, the Senate and House both adopted amendments granting extensive religious exemptions. Those exemptions provide:

[A] religious organization ... or any nonprofit institution or organization operated, supervised or controlled by or in conjunction with a religious organization ..., shall not be required to provide services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods or privileges to an individual if the request for [them]... is related to the solemnization of a marriage or celebration of a marriage and such solemnization or celebration is in violation of their religious beliefs and faith....

... The marriage laws of this state shall not ... shall not require a fraternal benefit society ... which is operated, supervised or controlled by ... a religious organization to provide insurance benefits to any person if to do so would violate the fraternal benefit society's free exercise of religion as guaranteed by the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States and section 3 of article first of the Constitution of the state.

Nothing in this act shall be deemed or construed to affect the manner in which a religious organization may provide adoption, foster care or social services if such religious organization does not receive state or federal funds for that specific program or purpose.

The bill also provides that no member of the clergy shall be required to solemnize any marriage in violation of his or her right to the free exercise of religion and no church shall be required to participate in solemnizing a marriage in violation of its religious beliefs.

Yesterday's edition of The Edge reports on the amendments adopted Wednesday. Yesterday's Hartford Courant, reporting on the bill, points out that the state legislature rejected broader proposals that would have exempted objecting individuals and businesses from having to provide services in connection with same-sex marriages.

Judge Refuses To Enjoin Installation of New Pastor of Prestigious NY Church

The New York Times reported yesterday that a New York state trial judge effectively denied a motion for a temporary injunction sought by dissidents to prevent the installation of Rev. Dr. Brad R. Braxton as Senior Pastor of the historic Riverside Church on Manhattan's upper West side. Judge Lewis Bart Stone adjourned the case until late May, well after the installation of Rev. Braxton scheduled for Sunday. A group of congregants are concerned about the size of Braxton's compensation package and his more conservative style of religious practice. In the past, Riverside Church has been a center of social activism. The judge urged the parties to reach a settlement of their disputes.

Report Urges Changes To Protect Against Improper Searches of Muslims Returning to US

Earlier this week, Muslim Advocates issued a report titled Unreasonable Intrusions: Investigating the Politics, Faith & Finances of Americans Returning Home. Here is an excerpt from the Executive Summary of the 52-page report:

Law-abiding Muslim, Arab and South Asian Americans returning home after overseas travel have experienced widespread, systematic and profound privacy intrusions by federal agents at the nation’s borders and airports. U.S. Department of Homeland Security ("DHS") Customs & Border Protection ("CBP") agents have questioned individuals about their political beliefs, religious practices, and charities they support. Agents have also sought to review and copy business cards, credit cards, and data on laptops, digital cameras and cell phones. These interrogations and searches are taking place without evidence or even suspicion that the travelers have engaged in wrongdoing.

These experiences and others chronicled in this report suggest that law-abiding Americans are being systematically selected by CBP agents for searches and interrogations on the basis of race, religion, and national origin. Far from serving legitimate aims, such profiling undermines security, wasting scarce government resources and generating mountains of false leads, as well as eroding trust between law enforcement authorities and the public....

Muslim Advocates proposes a series of discrete policy revisions that would restore constitutional protections eroded by the status quo border security apparatus and allow ample authority for the government to conduct legitimate activities to protect our nation’s security. They include steps that both the executive branch and Congress can take to better protect our nation’s border and our rights.

Farhana Khera, Executive Director of Muslim Advocates, wrote about the report Wednesday on the Washington Post's Faith Divide blog.

6th Circuit Hears Oral Arguments In 10 Commandments Case

Yesterday, the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in ACLU v. Grayson County, Kentucky. In the case, a Kentucky federal district court, on Establishment Clause grounds, permanently enjoined a display of the Ten Commandments as part of a Foundations of American Law and Government Display in the Grayson County Courthouse. (See prior posting.) AP reported that the judges questioned counsel more than usual, as the two sides debated whether or not the county had a secular purpose for the display.

Hindu Group in RLUIPA Case Says Temple Size Is A Religious Necessity

AP reported yesterday that the Adhi Parasakthi Charitable, Medical, Educational and Cultural Society has recently filed a federal lawsuit against West Pikeland Township, Pennsylvania, challenging the Township's refusal to permit the group to build a Hindu Temple larger than 5,000 square feet on a 24.5 acre site in an area zoned residential and conservation. The group wants to build a 26,000-square-foot temple and a 9,000-square-foot auxiliary support building on the site in Chester Springs. Neighbors object. Some of them voiced concerns at the Township Supervisors meeting about a "mosque" and possible movement in of Hindus.

According to a report by Westpikeland.org, proceedings at the Zoning Hearing Board hearing last August revealed that while Hindu group has some 200 members, only about 20 live within 50 miles of the proposed Temple site. The group's attorney, Richard Lipow, says the size of the proposed Temple is dictated by religious considerations. Certain gods need to be a distance from others. The group says that the Township's zoning ordinances violate the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act as well as the group's free exercise, free expression and assembly rights. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Markup of Hate Crimes Bill Begins, Amid Opposition By Some Christian Groups

Yesterday, the House Judiciary Committee began the mark-up of HR 1913, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009. Among other things, the bill will extend coverage to certain crimes committed because of a person's actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity. It will also increase assistance to state and local governments in fighting hate crimes. The Advocate reports that Republican Congressmen opposed to passage of the bill offered a large number of amendments, all of which were defeated. One amendment proposed adding "unborn child" to the definition of those against whom Hate Crimes might be perpetrated. Another amendment proposed adding "pregnant women." Rep. Steve King of Iowa suggested changing the bill's name to the "Local Law Enforcement Thought Crimes Prevention Act of 2009."

Some Christian groups are again this year raising the spectre that the bill, if enacted, would infringe the right of Christian ministers to oppose homosexuality. For example, Jeff King, president of International Christian Concern, called the bill "a backdoor tool from the far left and radical homosexuals to shut down legitimate free speech from Christians and others who oppose their lifestyle." ICC argued that the federal aiding and abetting statute (18 USC 2) could allow prosecution of those "who teach that homosexual behavior is sinful and that Islam is a false religion." A release issued by Americans United this week counters the argument, saying:

The bill penalizes assault and physical violence, not speech. In fact, the legislation makes it clear that free speech is protected. Section 10 states, "Nothing in this Act, or the amendments made by this Act, shall be construed to prohibit any expressive conduct protected from legal prohibition by, or any activities protected by the free speech or free exercise clauses of, the First Amendment to the Constitution."

UPDATE: CQ reports that on Thursday (4/23), the House Judiciary Committee approved the Hate Crimes bill by a vote of 15-12. The Committee defeated more than a dozen proposed Republican amendments to the bill.

"Defamation of Religion" and the Durban Review Conference Final Draft

JTA reports that delegates at the United Nations Durban Review Conference in Geneva this week surprisingly adopted the Conference final document on Tuesday, three days before the end of the conference. This move was apparently designed to prevent further debate and modification of the document, or perhaps to prevent further walkouts by delegates. The New York Times describes the action by Conference delegates a bit differently. It reports that while final adoption of the resolution will occur on Friday, on Tuesday the resolution was adopted by the committee that coordinates the conference so that it is no longer open to debate or amendment.

Particularly after the inflammatory speech on Monday by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, most of the press attention has been focused on the Conference's treatment of the Israeli-Palestinian issue. Here the Conference's final document is seen by the U.S. and some other countries as no improvement over Durban I because it "reaffirmed" the 2001 Durban Declaration. (Philadelpha Evening Bulletin.) Anne Bayefsky in the New York Daily News yesterday expanded on the anti-Israel elements of the Conference.

However, another issue of concern leading up to the conference has been efforts by Islamic states to get language into the final document barring "defamation of religion." That reference was removed in negotiations last month. (See prior posting.) The language remains out of the final document; but reference to "negative stereotyping of religions" remains in. This reference can be used by countries to prevent debate or criticism of religious ideas. (See press release from ARTICLE 19.) However the final document also strongly emphasizes the importance of freedom of expression.

In what appears to be the final version of the Outcome Document that was adopted (March 17 draft from UN Watch), here is the relevant language:

10. Recognizes with deep concern the negative stereotyping of religions and the global rise in the number of incidents of racial or religious intolerance and violence, including Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, Christianophobia and anti-Arabism;
　
11. Reaffirms that any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law, as well as the dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority and hatred and acts of violence and incitement to such acts, and that these prohibitions are consistent with freedom of opinion and expression;....

55. Reaffirms the positive role that the exercise of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, as well as the full respect for the freedom to seek, receive and impart information can play in combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance;
　
56. Stresses that the right to freedom of opinion and expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic, pluralistic society, since it ensures access to a multitude of ideas and views;

Another press release this week from the UK free speech group, ARTICLE 19, decrying the boycotting of the Conference by some countries, describes the Document's language on free expression in more upbeat terms than many other rights groups might be willing to do:

Months of negotiation have resulted in a draft Outcome Document that reaffirms the essential role of freedom of expression and freedom of information while omitting any reference to "defamation of religions", a concept rejected by free speech activists because it protects belief systems against criticisms or jokes and is incompatible with international human rights law. The Document's current language acknowledges the primacy of the individual as rights holder rather than religion.

According to Mr. Moataz El Fegiery, Executive Director of Cairo Institute for Human Rights, "The replacement of 'defamation of religion' with language protecting an individual's freedom of belief represents a significant acknowledgment by the international community that international law does not recognise this concept; and that it should not be used by the United Nations."

Amended Complaint Protests Second Song Given To 3rd Graders In Florida School

Last week, a Florida federal district court issued a preliminary injunction on Establishment Clause grounds barring Webster Elementary School in St. Johns County, Florida from directing students to rehearse or perform the Diamond Rio band's song, "In God We Still Trust." (See prior posting.) On Tuesday, an amended complaint was filed in the case charging that five days after the issuance of the preliminary injunction, the music teacher at Webster began to teach another "sectarian" song, again to third-graders. This one is titled "Chatter With the Angels." According to yesterday's St. Augustine Record, the amended complaint charges that directing students to perform "Chatter" constitutes retaliation against plaintiffs for having brought the suit challenging "In God We Still Trust." The amended complaint seeks a preliminary injunction barring introduction of this song until the court can rule on the merits of plaintiffs' objections.

In an updated report this morning, the St. Augustine Record says that Chatter With the Angels, an African-American spiritual, is in an approved textbook used throughout the state, and the song has been on the state's approved teaching list for over 20 years. School district officials say the song will not be sung again until the court makes a ruling. Here, via YouTube, is a performance of "Chatter With the Angels" by a Bridgeport (CT) Children's Choir.

NY Murder Trial, Pevaded By Religion, Ends with Convictions

The New York Times on Monday reported on the conclusion of a Queens (NY) murder trial that has torn apart the small local community of Bukharian Jews. The two defendants were sentenced to life in prison without parole. One defendant, Dr. Mazoltuv Borukhova was charged with hiring the other defendant, Mikhail Mallayev, to murder her estranged husband, Dr. Daniel Malikov, after a court awarded temporary custody of their daughter to Malikov. The murder took place on a playground in front of the 4 year old daughter. As reflected in a New York Times article last month, the defendants' religion has been a pervasive theme in the background of the trial:

Both Dr. Borukhova and Mr. Mallayev told the police that they would never be involved in anything illegal because of their religious beliefs. Dr. Borukhova's relatives sit every day in the second row of State Supreme Court, murmuring prayers from books printed in Russian and Hebrew. Dr. Malakov’s relatives occasionally hiss at them across the aisle.

Covering their hair in accordance with religious rules for married women, Dr. Borukhova’s sisters wear bouffant wigs that became an issue when prosecutors claimed that an eyewitness saw one sister at the murder scene..... Mr. Mallayev wore a black leather skullcap and matching jacket early in the trial, but switched to a more staid look: a suit and a velvet yarmulke bearing the Star of David. Earlier, he refused on religious grounds to shave his beard to appear in a lineup, finally agreeing to a shave with an electric razor.

The defendants' Sabbath observance became the center of another controversy as the judge attempted to assure that the trial would end and the jury would return a verdict before his previously scheduled vacation was to begin. In order to avoid court appearances on the Sabbath, defendants' counsel ended up having only overnight to prepare his summation, while the prosecution ended up with the weekend to prepare theirs.

Just before sentencing, Mallayev told the judge he did not kill anyone, saying: "I live by the Ten Commandments." During sentencing, Justice Robert J. Hanophy quoted both the New Testament and Confucius.