Illinois Supreme Court Says Limitiations Extension Cannot Be Applied Retroactively

In Doe v. Diocese of Dallas, (IL Sup. Ct., Sept. 24, 2009), the Illinois Supreme Court refused to apply retroactively a 2003 amendment to Illinois law extending the statute of limitations in civil actions alleging child sexual abuse. The suit was filed by plaintiff who had been abused by a Catholic priest when he was 14 years old. However under prior law, the statute of limitations had run on his claim before the 2003 amendments took effect. The court concluded that even though the legislature had intended for the amended statute of limitations to apply retroactively: "once a claim is time barred, it cannot be revived through subsequent legislative action without offending the due process protections of our state's constitution." Friday's Belleville (IL) News-Democrat reported on the decision.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In May v. Donneli, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85495 (ND NY, Aug. 25, 2009), a New York federal magistrate judge held that merely a loss of a few pounds was insufficient physical injury to justify a claim for compensatory damages under the Prison Litigation Reform Act that precludes compensatory damages for emotional injury unaccompanied by physical injury. In the case, a prisoner asserted that for seven days of Ramadan he was precluded from breaking the fast with blessed food. The court also held that a damage claim under the NY Corrections Law had to be brought in the state court of claims.

In Davis v. Hightower, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85505 (ND FL, July 13, 2009), a federal magistrate judge recommended rejection of a Wiccan inmate's claim that his free exercise rights were infringed when authorities confiscated 9 "religious healing stones" from his property which he used to help heal his peptic ulcer.

Mauwee v. Donat, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86148 (D NV, Sept. 18, 2009), involved claims that prison officials desecrated the prison's sweat lodge area by allowing non-Indians to use it. A Nevada federal district court concluded that damage claims are not permitted under RLUIPA and that plaintiffs' claim for equitable relief was precluded by qualified immunity. It also concluded that objections to changes in sweat lodge procedures were now moot since those changes had been rescinded. The magistrate's recommended findings in the case are at 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86141 (May 28, 2009).

In Kinney v. Curtin, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86225 (WD MI, July 29, 2009), and in Thomas v. Bergh, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86893 (WD MI, Aug. 21, 2009), a Michigan federal magistrate judge recommended that the court uphold decisions to deny plaintiffs participation in their prison's kosher food program because plaintiff had not shown that his beliefs were sincerely held.

In Parks v. Smith, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87147 (ND NY, Sept. 23, 2009), a New York federal district court accepted most of the magistrate's recommendations (2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87210, Aug. 17, 2009) allowing a Jehovah's Witness inmate to move ahead with his claim that authorities violated his free exercise rights and his rights under RLUIPA when they disciplined him for attempting to mail a photograph of himself in a meditation pose to a company for use in a personal ad. Prison authorities claim that the pose is in fact a gang signal. The court rejected the magistrate's holding that plaintiff's free exercise and retaliation claims were duplicative. He might be able to show retaliation based on religion even if he did not succeed in his claim that his rights were infringed when authorities classified his meditation pose as a gang signal.

In Strope v. McKune, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86886 (D KS, Sept. 22, 2009) and Strope v. Cummings, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86885 (D KS, Sept. 22, 2009), a Kansas federal district court rejected claims that Assembly of Yahweh inmates were not given adequate time for worship. It also rejected claims that certain foods served to those on the kosher diet were routinely spoiled, and that other foods were not included. UPDATE: The 10th Circuit affirmed (June 11, 2010).

In Shepard v. Peryam, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87189 (SD FL, Aug. 20, 2009), a Florida federal magistrate judge recommended that the court reject claims by a Muslim pre-trial detainee that he was denied religious services, prayer beads, a prayer rug, a Kufi (prayer cap), and a Kosher diet.

In Floyd v. Leslie, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87758 (ND IN, Sept. 23, 2009), and Indiana federal district court allowed an inmate to move ahead with his complaint that a prison officer denied him access to Satanist religious material that belonged to him, but the court dismissed plaintiff's claim against the prison's chaplain.

In Jenkins v. Vail, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87730 (ED WA, Aug. 31, 2009), a federal district court (rejecting a magistrate's recommendations, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87769, July 22, 2009) refused to grant a preliminary injunction to a Muslim inmate who would not participate in work or educational programming on the ground that his sincerely held religious beliefs prevent him from supporting a non-Islamic government.

Moorish American Corrections Officers Can Move Ahead With Discrimination Allegations

Bey v. City of New York, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87793 (SDNY, Sept. 9, 2009), is a lawsuit brought by a group of former New York City correction officers who were members of the Moorish American faith which teaches that Moors are exempt from taxation. They were terminated from their positions after hearings at which it was found that they had submitted false documents claiming to be tax exempt. They then sued, arguing that others of different faiths who had submitted false tax forms received less severe discipline. The court allowed certain of the plaintiffs to move ahead with equal protection and Establishment Clause claims, finding that "there remains a triable issue of fact as to whether Defendants' explanation for Plaintiffs' harsher treatment - that they persisted in their assertion of tax exempt status and failed to take affirmative steps to repay their taxes - is pretextual and whether, in fact, the Moors were singled out for harsher treatment based on their religion."

Guardian Ad Litem Has Immunity As To Comments On Mother's Religious Views

In Wood v. Epley, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87490 (SD OH, Sept. 9, 2009), an Ohio federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing as frivolous a lawsuit brought by Kyra Wood seeking $40 million in damages from an attorney who was appointed guardian ad litem by a state juvenile court to represent the interests of her daughter. Wood alleged that she was deprived of her free exercise rights because of unflattering comments the guardian ad litem made to the court about her religious expression. The court said that the guardian ad litem has absolute immunity from liability growing out of his testimony as to what he believes are in the best interest of the Wood's daughter.

Christian Group Complains About Ganesh Statue At Calgary Zoo

In Canada, the publicly funded Calgary Zoo some two years ago put up a statue of the Hindu deity Ganesh-- a figure with an elephant head-- near the zoo's elephant display. An anonymous donor supplied funds for the statue in memory of her late father who worked and travelled extensively in Asia. According to yesterday's Calgary Herald, Concerned Christians Canada wrote the zoo this week complaining about the statue. The letter (full text) said: "The zoo is not a place of religious indoctrination, it is supposed to be a safe family environment free of religious icons and selective religious partiality." A zoo spokesman, however, says that the statue is a cultural symbol that shows the tie between the elephants and Asian culture. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Christian Reformed Church Gets Title To Property Over Breakaway Congregation

In Lamont Community Church v. Lamont Christian Reformed Church, (MI Ct. App., Sept. 22, 2009), a Michigan appellate court held that the Christian Reformed Church in North America is a hierarchical denomination, and therefore that civil courts are required to honor the determinations made by the denomination's parent body in resolving a property dispute between it and a break away congregation. Here the denomination, through its Zeeland Classis, determined that the congregation had no authority to transfer congregational property to a new entity without the consent of its regional Classis. The congregation argued that the denomination's rule governing the procedure to be used to determine ownership of property when a congregation disaffiliates did not take effect until after it had transferred its property. The court, however, said it was bound by the denomination’s determination that the rule took effect before the transfer at issue. [Thanks to Brian D. Wassom for the lead.]

Hasidic Congregation Gets Reversal of Damage Award, But Loses On Other Issues

This week, a New York appellate court handed down a decision in a dispute between two neighboring Orthodox Jewish congregations in Kiryas Joel (NY), a town populated primarily by members of the Satmar Hasidic community. A bit or reading between the lines is necessary to understand the disputes that were ruled on by the court in Bais Yoel Ohel Feige v. Congregation Yetev Lev D'Satmar of Kiryas Joel, (NY App. Div., Sept. 22, 2009). (It is not clear whether this case is part of a larger leadership battle within the Satmar movement.)

It appears that originally the 3,000-member Congregation Yetev Lev ("CYL") owned a synagogue building, surrounding parking lots and a nearby residence that was used as living quarters by its rabbi. In some fashion, Bais Yoel Ohel Feige ("BYOF") took ownership of the residence and began to use it as a synagogue. It also filed a suit under Art. 15 of New York's Real Property Actions & Proceedings Law to confirm its ownership of the premises. CYL brought several counterclaims. One asserted that BYOF's use of the property violated the town's zoning code. The appellate court agreed and upheld a trial court's injunction because the zoning code, as amended in 2007, requires a site plan review by the Village Zoning Board for operating a place of worship in a residence.

The appellate court however reversed the trial court's award of nearly $745,000 in damages on another counterclaim by CYL which complained that individuals attending services at BYOF had continuously used CYL's parking area. The appellate court concluded that there was no evidence that BYOF had instructed its members where to park and that, in any event, CYL had not put up signs attempting to restrict who could use its lots. Also testimony as to how many BYOF members parked there was speculative. Finally the appellate court held that CYL retained an implied easement to access the basement and roof of the residence area to install and repair water, sewer and utility lines and HVAC equipment that apparently served CYL's building. [Thanks to Y.Y. Landa for the lead.]

Religious Groups Active On Several Issues At G-20

Religious groups have been active at the G-20 Summit in Pittsburgh. Yesterday 30 religious leaders from numerous faiths met with U.S. deputy national security adviser Michael Froman urging action on problems faced by the world's poorest people. (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.) Also yesterday morning more than 100 people gathered in one area of Pittsburgh to call for China to allow freedom to practice Falun Gong, while in another area of the city 15 Burmese monks and about 40 supporters protested human rights conditions in Myanmar. (Beliefnet News.) [Thanks to Insitute on Religion & Public Policy for the leads.]

4th Circuit Says Westboro's "Utterly Distasteful" Picketing Is Protected By 1st Amendment

In Snyder v. Phelps, (4th Cir., Sept. 24, 2009), the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the Westboro Baptist Church and its leaders that a $5 million judgment against them growing out of their picketing of the funeral of Iraq veteran Matthew Snyder violated their free speech rights. Westboro Baptist Church members have gained notoriety for their picketing of veterans' funerals carrying signs attacking America's acceptance of gays. Here Snyder's father claimed that the picketing and a related Internet posting amounted to an invasion of privacy by intrusion upon seclusion, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and civil conspiracy. The majority held that defendants' picket signs, while "utterly distasteful" nevertheless involve matters of public concern including the issue of homosexuals in the military, the sex-abuse scandal within the Catholic Church, and the political and moral conduct of the United States and its citizens.

The court held that additionally no reasonable reader could interpret any of the signs, or the Internet posting, as asserting actual and objectively verifiable facts about Snyder or his son. They are merely "imaginative and hyperbolic rhetoric intended to spark debate about issues with which the Defendants are concerned." Judge Shedd, concurring in the judgment, would have avoided the constitutional issue by holding that Snyder failed to introduce sufficient evidence at trial to support the jury verdict in his favor.

Today's Baltimore Sun reports on the decision and reactions to it. Meanwhile this week Westboro members began a campaign to picket synagogues in Brooklyn, New York just before Yom Kippur. Westboro spokesperson Shirley Phelps-Roper told the The Brooklyn Paper that their efforts could be seen as an "obey your God rally." Also, last week, just before Rosh Hashanah, Westboro picketers turned up outside the University of Oklahoma's Hillel Foundation. According to the AP, Phelps-Roper said the church stopped there as part of a "love campaign" to critize Jews for "killing Christ."

Capitol Visitor Center Hosts Premiere of Film On Religion In America

Last December the U.S. Capitol Visitor Center opened amidst protests from conservatives (including former House Speaker Newt Gingrich) that it failed to appropriately honor America's religious heritage. (See prior posting.) This led to Congressional resolutions directing the Architect of the Capitol to engrave the motto "In God We Trust" on a large pillar in the Visitor Center, and a lawsuit being filed challenging that directive. (See prior posting.) According to Politcio, despite the lawsuit, work on the engraving began this week and tonight at the Visitor Center former Speaker Gingrich hosts the premiere of his documentary — Rediscovering God in America II: Our Heritage. The film explores the role of religion in early American history.

This Sunday Is Second "Pulpit Freedom Sunday"

Alliance Defense Fund announced yesterday that its second annual Pulpit Freedom Sunday will be held on September 27. The event is part of ADF's Pulpit Initiative which is designed to challenge the constitutionality of Internal Revenue Code provisions barring partisan electoral activity by Section 501(c)(3) non-profits, including churches. This year more than 80 pastors will preach sermons related to biblical perspectives on the positions of electoral candidates or current government officials who are not involved in election contests. ADF has posted legal resources for participating churches. Last year some critics charged that ADF was in violation of ethical rules binding on lawyers who practice before the IRS by encouraging churches to violate the tax code. (See prior posting.) ADF this year makes clear that there is no legal problem with pastors speaking from the pulpit about current government officials who are not presently candidates for elective office. ADF complains that "the IRS has issued increasingly vague guidance on the law, which limits the First Amendment rights of pastors speaking from the pulpit, but has continued to launch investigations while avoiding court review of the constitutionality of its actions."

UPDATE: ADF reports that 83 churches from 30 states and D.C. participated in the 2009 Pulpit Sunday.

Court Dismisses Prof's Dismissal Complaint Under Ecclesiastical Abstention Doctrine

Earlier this week, an Ohio trial court held that under the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine it could not decide a breach of contract claim (full text of complaint) brought by David Hoffeditz, a Professor of Bible and Greek, against Cedarville University, a Baptist college. Yesterday's Chronicle of Higher Education reports that Greene County Common Pleas judge J. Timothy Campbell concluded that he could not decide whether the tenured associate professor's dismissal was for just cause without examining matters of religious doctrine. The First Amendment precludes such an inquiry. The court however refused to dismiss Hoffeditz's claim that the University committed fraud by extending his contract into the 2007-8 academic year without telling him it had already decided to dismiss him once its academic accreditation process was completed. Extensive documents related to the case are posted on a website title The Cedarville Situation.

Illinois High Court Upholds Bequest To Grandson Who Married Within the Faith

In In re Estate of Max Feinberg, (IL Sup. Ct., Sept. 24, 2009), the Illinois Supreme Court, by narrowly defining the issue before it, upheld the result desired by Max Feinberg who wanted to leave his estate only to those of his grandchildren who married within the Jewish faith. Four of his five grandchildren married non-Jews, and one of them contested the testamentary provisions that disinherited her. The state Court of Appeals upheld her challenge on public policy grounds. (See prior posting.)

The Supreme Court, however, focused on the fact that Feinberg's wife exercised a power of appointment she had been given under the terms of her husband's testamentary trust. She had directed that upon her death her two children and the grandson who had then married within the faith receive the assets that were currently in trusts. This eliminated many of the hypothetical concerns that had influenced the Court of Appeals' decision and eliminated any influence on future marital decisions of potential beneficiaries. No "dead hand" controlled the future conduct of beneficiaries because the wife locked in the identity of the beneficiaries by making a bequest "to reward, at the time of her death, those grandchildren whose lives most closely embraced the values she and Max cherished."

The Supreme Court also rejected constitutional claims, saying:

Because a testator or the settlor of a trust is not a state actor, there are no constitutional dimensions to his choice of beneficiaries. Equal protection does not require that all children be treated equally; due process does not require notice of conditions precedent to potential beneficiaries; and the free exercise clause does not require a grandparent to treat grandchildren who reject his religious beliefs and customs in the same manner as he treats those who conform to his traditions.

AP reports on the decision and gives additional background.

Funeral Director Loses On Most of Her Religious Discrimination Claims

In Prise v. Alderwoods Group, Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86445 (WD PA, Spet. 21, 2009), a Pennsylvania federal district court dismissed religious discrimination claims under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act. Funeral director Deborah Prise was placed on paid leave and then fired as manager of the Hirsch Funeral Home . She claimed the actions against her involved employment discrimination on the basis of religion. The court, however, concluded that the actions stemmed from the fact that Prise was attempting to run Hirsch Funeral Home in strict accordance with Jewish law, and that her superiors wanted to accommodate the needs of non-Jewish customers even when doing so would contravene Jewish law. The court also rejected Prise's failure to accommodate claim, finding that at most the funeral home merely refused to give her an absolute guarantee that she would never be required to work on the Jewish Sabbath or Jewish holidays. The court, however, permitted Prise to move ahead with her claims of retaliation for filing her discrimination complaints with the EEOC and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission, finding that factual questions remained as to those charges.

House Committee Holds Hearings On Employment Non-Discrimination Act

Yesterday, the House Committee on Education and Labor held its first hearing on H.R. 3017, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2009. The bill would prohibit employment discrimination, preferential treatment, and retaliation on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity by employers with 15 or more employees. The bill includes an exemption for any "corporation, association, educational institution, or society that is exempt from the religious discrimination provisions of title VII of the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 pursuant to section 702(a) or 703(e)(2) of such Act." A webcast of the hearing and transcripts of witnesses' statements are available on the Committee's website.

The testimony by Rabbi David Saperstein, Director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, endorsed the the bill's anti-discrimination provisions as stemming "from a core teaching shared by an array of faith traditions." he said that the religious institutions exemption has broad based support. However Craig L. Parshall, Senior Vice-President of the National Religious Broadcasters, criticized the religious institutions exemption as inadequate. More broadly, he argued:

Neither the Congress nor the courts have jurisdiction over the religious beliefs of people of faith. Holding the faithful in contempt because they advance unpopular religious doctrines itself evidences a form of cultural discrimination. Christian ministries that object to those sexual preferences which are in clear violation of the standards of the Bible are standing on a long and well-worn road.... The rights to preach and practice those beliefs spring from a Bill of Rights that is two hundred and twenty years old....

Polish Court Fines Catholic Magazine For Its Attack On Woman Seeking An Abortion

In Poland, a court has ordered the magazine Gosc Niedzielny, which is published by the Catholic Archdiocese of Katowice, to apologize and pay damages of nearly $11,000 (US) to Alicja Tysiac who attempted unsuccessfully to obtain an abortion when her pregnancy threatened her eyesight. The Catholic publication vilified Tysiac for "wanting to kill her child," and equated abortion with Nazi medical experiments. AP reported yesterday that Judge Ewa Solecka held that Catholics are free to express their moral disapproval of abortion in a general way, but must stop short of vilifying an individual. The offending article in Gosc Niedzielny was in response to an award of damages to Tysiac who had sued Poland in the European Court of Human Rights. The magazine says yesterday's decision infringes its freedom of speech, and it plans an appeal.

Polygamy Charges Dismissed By British Columbia Supreme Court

An expected constitutional challenge to polygamy laws in the Canadian province of British Columbia (see prior posting) has been short circuited as province's Supreme Court quashed the indictments against two FLDS leaders on other grounds. In Blackmore v. British Columbia (Attorney General), (BC Sup. Ct., Sept. 23, 2009), the Court held that British Columbia's attorney general lacked authority to order appointment of a second special prosecutor to bring polygamy charges against leaders of two separate factions of the FLDS Church after a first special prosecutor recommended against bringing charges. Section 7.5 of the Crown Counsel Act provides that "the decision of a special prosecutor with respect to any matter within his or her mandate is final." The Court held that the appointment here of successive prosecutors is exactly the kind of political interference with the charging process that the Crown Counsel Act is meant to prohibit. Canadian Press yesterday reported on the decision.

Spanish Judge Works Out Compromise With Witness Wearing Burka

A Spanish judge yesterday worked out a compromise with a witness in a criminal trial who insisted on wearing her burqa when she testified. Think Spain reports that the woman had been called to testify for the prosecution in the trial of nine Islamists charged with recruiting suicide bombers in order to send them to Iraq. After a conference in chambers with the woman and the prosecutor, the parties agreed that the witness would appear Monday wearing her burqa above her eyebrows and below her chin so the judge can see her face. She will testify with her back to the public gallery in the court room, and no cameras will be allowed.

Here Are Religious Liberty and Church-State Issues From Senate's Health Care Reform Bill

Last week, the Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, Sen. Max Baucus, introduced his detailed proposal for comprehensive health care reform, the America's Healthy Future Act of 2009. (Press release.) The committee has posted a 223 page document (the Chairman's Mark) describing the bill and a 348-page document summarizing a large number of proposed amendments from other Finance Committee members. Several items covered in the bill and proposed amendments are of particular interest to those following religious liberty and church-state matters-- abortion, conscience provisions, spiritual health care, faith-based grants and abstinence education.

Extensive attention has been given to issues relating to abortion services. A lengthy summary of the abortion provisions in the bill are in the Chairman's Mark at pp. 28-30 of that document. The provisions would:

• ensure that state laws prohibiting or requiring coverage or funding for abortions, and state laws involving abortion-related procedural requirements, are not preempted. The provision similarly provides that Federal conscience protections and abortion-related antidiscrimination laws would not be affected by the bill.
  
• abortions (beyond those for which federal funds can already be used) cannot be a mandated benefit as part of a minimum benefits package but a qualified health plan would not be prohibited from providing additional coverage. Federal funds continue to be prohibited from being used to pay for abortions unless the pregnancy is due to rape, incest, or if the life of the mother is in danger.


• no tax credit or cost-sharing credits may be used to pay for abortions beyond those for which federal funds may already be used. Insurers participating in any state-based exchange that offer additional abortion coverage must segregate from any premium and cost-sharing credits an amount of each enrollee's private premium dollars that is determined to be sufficient to cover the provision of those services.


• in each state exchange, at least one plan must provide additional abortion coverage and at least one plan must not provide such coverage.


• health benefits plans participating in state exchanges would be prohibited from discriminating against any individual health care provider or health care facility because of its willingness or unwillingness to provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions.

Other provisions of interest in the Chairman's Mark are:

• Pg. 31: Exemptions from the requirement to have health coverage would be allowed for religious objections that are consistent with those allowed under Medicare.
  
• Pg. 32: Exemptions from the excise tax on those who do not purchase health insurance policies will be made for any health arrangement provided by established religious organizations comprised of individuals with sincerely held beliefs (such as those participating in Health Sharing Ministries),.
  
• Pg. 76: states can apply for funds to provide incentives to Medicaid enrollees who successfully complete healthy lifestyle programs. In designing plans, States may collaborate with community-based programs, non-profit organizations, providers, and faith-based groups, among others.

Many of the proposed amendments are also of interest to those concerned with religious liberty and church-state issues. Here is a summary with an indication of the pages at which they appear:

• Pg. 36: Rockefeller Amendment #C22: $80 million annually would go to non-profit, community-based, and faith-based organizations as well as to states to cover the administrative costs of system and policy improvements that expedite enrollment and retention in the Children's Health Insurance Program.
  
• Pg. 79: Kerry-Hatch Amendment #C-14 (pg. 79): No qualified health plan offered through a State Exchange may deny benefits for religious or spiritual health care.
  
• Pg. 201: Hatch Amendment #C-10: Restores funding for abstinence education.
  
• Pg. 203: Hatch Amendment #C-12: Prohibits federal funds from being used to pay for assisted suicide and offers conscience protections to providers or plans refusing to offer assisted suicide services.
  
• Pg. 204: Hatch Amendment #C13: Non-discrimination on abortion and respect for right of conscience.
  
• Pg. 205: Hatch Amendment #C14: Prohibits federal funds under the Act from being used for elective abortions and plans that cover such abortions.
  
• Pg. 310: Enzi Amendment #C12: Prohibits requirement that a health plan cover abortions except in the case where the mother‘s life is in danger or the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest.
  
• Pg. 311: Enzi Amendment #C13: Prohibits federal funds to be used to pay for any abortion or cover any part of the cost of any health plan that includes coverage of abortion, except in the case where the mother‘s life is in danger or the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest. But individuals may purchase supplemental abortion coverage with non-federal funds.
  
• Pg. 312: Enzi Amendment #C14: Prohibits any provision in the bill from overturning or preempting constitutionally permissible laws or regulations of a State, that place limitations or procedural requirements on abortions, including any state law requiring parental notification or consent for the performance of an abortion on a minor.
  
• Pg. 313: Enzi Amendment #C15: Prohibits the federal, state or local governments, health care providers or plans that receives federal funds from discriminating against an individual or institution on the basis that they do not perform or participate in specific surgical or medical procedures or prescribe certain pharmaceuticals in violation of the moral, ethical, or religious beliefs of the individual or entity.

Yesterday the Interfaith Alliance released letters it sent to Sen. Orrin Hatch objecting to his Amendment #C-10 and to Sen. Michael Enzi objecting to his Amendment #C-15.

Litigation Over Church Property Was Costly For Both Sides In Colorado Springs

Yesterday's Colorado Springs Gazette reports on the high cost to both sides of the litigation over ownership of Colorado Springs Grace Church & St. Stephen's $17 million building after members split from the Episcopal Church USA. (See prior posting.) St. George’s Anglican Church-- the break away group that ultimately gave up the building-- has asked its members for a one-time family donation of $1,500 each to cover about $750,000 in legal fees plus tens of thousands of dollars in court costs. The Episcopal Diocese of Colorado spent $2.9 million to defend its ownership of the building. It was forced to sell stocks and bonds from its endowment portfolio to cover the costs at a time when its investment income dropped dramatically because of market conditions.