7 Indicted For Fraud In Payments for Internet Equipment For Yeshivas

Last Wednesday, the U.S.. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York announced the indictment (full text) of seven individuals on wire fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud charges growing out of federal payments intended to fund computer equipment for Orthodox Jewish yeshivas. The indictment charges that for many years, defendants billed the federal E-Rate program for millions of dollars in equipment that was not furnished, or was furnished at inflated prices and often was not needed.  The federal program is intended to provide schools and libraries serving economically disadvantaged children with internet access. According to a Forward report on the indictment: "Some of the internet services paid for by E-Rate had been requested by schools that ban internet use for religious reasons."

Street Preacher's Disturbing-the-Peace Citation Was Valid

In Roy v. City of Monroe, (WD LA, Aug. 29, 2018), a Louisiana federal district court dismissed a street preacher's suit challenging the constitutionality of the city of Monroe's disturbing-the-peace ordinance and the citation he received for violating it. The court described the conduct that led to the citation and summons:

The Corner Bar is known as a gathering spot for homosexuals. Roy believes that homosexuality is a sin. He preaches against homosexuality, as well as drinking alcohol, the use of drugs, fornication, and other topics.... On this night, they gathered at a telephone pole across the street from the Corner Bar. Roy was wearing an orange jump suit to demonstrate that he is a “prisoner of Christ” and to pose the questions to others, “Whose prisoner are you?”. At various times, he was also carrying a sixfoot cross made of cedar 4 x 4s. He normally approaches people and says something short to “startle” them or “stop” them. He cannot “afford to” be concerned about other people’s feelings because it might alter his message. Roy tells people that they are “going to Hell,” uses the terms “homosexual” and “whore,” and will tell people that “their father is the devil.” He raises his voice, shouts, and uses “strong Biblical language” to convey his message.

RLUIPA Challenges To Zoning Decision On Catholic Church Must Go To Trial

In Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Kansas City in Kansas v. City of Mission Woods, (D KA, Aug. 30, 2018), a Kansas federal district court refused to grant summary judgement for either party on most of the RLUIPA claims by a Catholic church that sought to convert a single family house into a meeting house. The city of Mission Woods had denied zoning approval for the project.

Protestant Navy Chaplains Lose Discrimination Lawsuit

In In re Navy Chaplaincy, (D DC, Aug. 30, 2018), a D.C. federal district court granted summary judgment for the U.S..Navy in a long-running suit by non-liturgical Protestant Navy chaplains alleging discrimination against them. The court summarized the facts and its holding:

Plaintiffs’ primary claim is that, until 2002, the Navy maintained an unconstitutional policy of placing at least one Roman Catholic chaplain on every selection board, which resulted in Catholic chaplains being promoted at a disproportionately high rate compared to other religious groups. Plaintiffs also challenge a host of other allegedly unconstitutional selection-board policies and procedures—some of which, plaintiffs claim, continue to this day. Finally, plaintiffs challenge a statute that privileges selection-board deliberations from disclosure in litigation, arguing that it is unconstitutional as applied to their case because it denies them access to information that they need to prove their constitutional claims. To redress these wrongs, plaintiffs—each of whom was either passed over for promotion or selected for early retirement by a board that was allegedly tainted by one or more of the challenged procedures—seek an order directing the Navy to reinstate them to active duty, if necessary, and to convene new, properly constituted selection boards to reconsider the personnel actions taken against them....

To a considerable extent, the result in this case is dictated by prior rulings.... Consequently, there is little left to do here but to apply those standards ... which, as explained below, does not even come close to showing the degree of discrimination required for plaintiffs’ challenges to succeed. Likewise, this Court has already twice considered and twice rejected plaintiffs’ constitutional challenge to the statutory privilege for selection-board proceedings...

Supreme Court Refuses Emergency Injunction In Catholic Social Services Foster Care Case

In a one-sentence order yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to grant an emergency injunction in Fulton v. Philadelphia.  In the case, a Pennsylvania federal district court rejected Catholic Social Services challenges to Philadelphia' requirement that it not discriminate against same-sex couples in foster care placement. Catholic Social Services wanted the Supreme Court to allow it to continue foster care placements while it appealed the city's intake freeze to the 3rd Circuit. Justices Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch would have granted the injunction. SCOTUSblog reports on the court's action

Excluding Non-Theists As Legislative Guest Chaplains Violates Establishment Clause

In Fields v. Speaker of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, (MD PA, Aug. 29, 2018), a Pennsylvania federal district court held that the guest chaplain policy of Pennsylvania's House of Representatives violates the Establishment Clause.  The legislative chamber's policy allows invocations to be given only by  individuals who adhere to, or are members of a religious organization that subscribes to, a belief in “God” or a “divine” or “higher” power. The House Speaker and Parliamentarian refused to permit a non-theist to serve as a guest chaplain to deliver an invocation. The court said in part:

That history has tolerated the natural prevalence of theistic legislative prayer is hardly evidence that the Framers would abide deliberate and categorical exclusion of nontheists. Accordingly, the House’s prayer practice finds no refuge in history and tradition....

In light of this nation’s vastly diverse religious tapestry, there is no justification to sanction government’s establishment of a category of favored religions—like monotheistic or theistic faiths—through legislative prayer.

The court also held:

The House’s pre-2017 opening invocation practice, which coerces visitors to stand during the opening prayer and thereby participate in a religious exercise, likewise offends the Establishment Clause.

Americans United issued a press release announcing the decision.

Court Will Not Order Group's Christian Flag Displayed On City Flag Pole

In Shurtleff v. City of Boston, (D MA, Aug. 29, 2018), a Massachusetts federal district court refused to grant a preliminary injunction against the city's policy of refusing to fly non-secular flags from City Hall flagpoles.  Plaintiffs sought to fly a "Christian flag” from the city's pole in conjunction with a Constitution Day and Citizenship Day event.  Rejecting plaintiffs' free speech argument, the court said in part:

If the flags are government speech, as Defendants assert, “then the Free Speech Clause has no application” and the City may “select the views that it wants to express.” ... In contrast, if the flags are private speech displayed in a limited public forum, as Plaintiffs argue, the restriction on non-secular flags must be reasonable and viewpoint neutral.... This Court concludes that the selection and display of the flags on the City flagpole constitute government speech. Moreover, even if they did not constitute government speech, the Court finds that the City’s restriction on non-secular flags satisfies the constitutional requirements for limitations on speech in a limited public forum....

The City’s policy is ... reasonable based on the City’s interest in avoiding the appearance of endorsing a particular religion and a consequential violation of the Establishment Clause.... Moreover, ... [in suggesting] the opportunity to conduct their event on City Hall Plaza, fly a secular flag on the City flagpole or display the Christian flag on City Hall Plaza but not on the City flagpole, the City has demonstrated reasonableness and that it does not seek to silence Plaintiffs. 

The court also rejected Establishment Clause and Equal Protection challenges. Boston Globe reports on the decision.

UN Report Says Investigate Myanmar Generals for Genocide

On Monday, the United Nations Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar released a Report (full text) recommending that Myanmar’s top military generals must be investigated for genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes directed at the minority Rohingya people.  CNN has more on the report.

Settlement Reached In D.C. Mikveh Voyeurism Case

As reported by yesterday's Washington Post, a $14.25 million settlement has been reached in the class action lawsuit growing out of the secret taping by Rabbi Barry Freundel of women using the mikveh (ritual bath) affiliated with Freundel's synagogue. The spying took place between 2005 and 2014. Under the settlement, which still must be approved by the court, each woman who was videotaped will receive at least $25,000. Other women who used the mikvah may receive $2.500. Defendants' insurance company will pay the settlement. Freundel was sentenced in 2015 to six and one-half years in prison.

Amicus Briefs Filed With SCOTUS In Case of Funeral Home's Firing of Transgender Employee

Several amicus briefs have been filed with the U.S. Supreme Court urging the Court to grant certiorari in R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. EEOC. Links to the briefs are available at SCOTUSblog.  In the case, the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, rejecting the employer's religious freedom defense, held that a Michigan funeral home violated Title VII when it fired a transgender employee. (See prior posting.) Townhall has more on these developments.

8th Circuit: Satanic Temple Member Lacks Standing To Challenge Abortion Restrictions

In Satanic Temple v. Parson, (8th Cir., Aug. 28, 2018), the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal (see prior posting) of a challenge to Missouri's abortion restrictions. The court said in part:

Mary Doe is a member of The Satanic Temple and a resident of the state of Missouri. After becoming pregnant, she sought an abortion in St. Louis, Missouri. She complied with certain state-mandated procedures, which the complaint alleges constituted direct and unwelcome personal contact with religion, in violation of the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses. After receiving the abortion, she filed this lawsuit....

Here, Mary Doe was not pregnant at the date the action was initiated and seeks only prospective relief.... Mary Doe therefore lacks constitutional standing. Additionally, although “[p]regnancy provides a classic justification for a conclusion of nonmootness,” the doctrine does not apply here because she did not first establish standing.

Courthouse News Service reports on the decision.

8th Circuit Embraces Historical Practices Test In Upholding "In God We Trust" on Currency

In New Doe Child #1 v. United States, (8th Cir., Aug. 28, 2018), the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a constitutional challenge to the placement of the motto "In God We Trust" on U.S. coins and currency.  While the result is consistent with that of numerous other circuits, the analysis set out by the majority opinion is of particular interest. Judge Gruender, writing for himself and Judge Beam, takes the position that the Supreme Court's decision in Town of
Greece v. Galloway  signaled a "'major doctrinal shift' in Establishment Clause jurisprudence," explaining:

In Galloway, the Supreme Court offered an unequivocal directive: “[T]he Establishment Clause must be interpreted by reference to historical practices and understandings.”...[H]istorical practices often reveal what the Establishment Clause was originally understood to permit, while attention to coercion highlights what it has long been understood to prohibit....

... [H]istorical practices confirm that the Establishment Clause does not require courts to purge the Government of all religious reflection or to “evince a hostility to religion by disabling the government from in some ways recognizing our religious heritage.”....

 Here, we recognize that convenience may lead some Plaintiffs to carry cash, but nothing compels them to assert their trust in God. Certainly no “reasonable observer” would think that the Government is attempting to force citizens to express trust in God with every monetary transaction.... Indeed, the core of the Plaintiffs’ argument is that they are continually confronted with “what they feel is an offensive religious message.” But Galloway makes clear that “[o]ffense . . . does not equate to coercion.”

Judge Kelly's concurring opinion argues that Galloway was merely a clarification of exiting Establishment Clause doctrine, not a sea change in it; but that exiting Supreme Court case law upholds the motto.

Judge Gruender, in portions of his opinion joined by all 3 judges on the panel, went on to reject plaintiffs' free speech, free exercise, RFRA and equal protection challenges.  In considering plaintiffs' RFRA challenge, the court held that plaintiffs have failed to allege a "substantial burden" on their exercise of religion, saying in part:

Here, the complaint alleges that the cost of the Plaintiffs’ adherence to their religious convictions is “relinquishing the convenience of carrying the nation’s money.” While cash may be a convenient means of participating in the economy, there are many alternatives that would not violate the Plaintiffs’ stated beliefs....

We recognize that, in limited circumstances, there may not be a viable cash alternative. But the complaint does not allege that the Plaintiffs are unable to make necessary or even regular purchases, and we do not think that difficulty buying “a popsicle from the neighborhood ice cream truck” or using a coin-operated laundry machine is what the Supreme Court had in mind when it said that RFRA protects against the denial of “full participation in the economic life of the Nation.” See Hobby Lobby, 134 S. Ct. at 2775-76, 2779, 2783.

Becket Fund issued a press release announcing the decision. Reuters reports on the decision.

What Else Did President Trump Tell Evangelical Leaders?

As previously reported, yesterday President Trump spoke to evangelical leaders at a dinner in the State Dining Room of the White House. Subsequently the White House posted a transcript of the President's remarks.  It appears to be a transcript of the remarks as delivered, not merely as prepared, since audience applause is noted a various points.  However, CNN today reports on other quotations which it says were taken from a recording of the President's "closed-door remarks" in the State Dining Room. Apparently these preceded or followed the remarks posted by the White House.  Here are the quotes as reported by CNN:

This November 6 election is very much a referendum on not only me, it's a referendum on your religion, it's a referendum on free speech and the First Amendment. It's a referendum on so much.

It's not a question of like or dislike, it's a question that they will overturn everything that we've done and they will do it quickly and violently. And violently. There is violence. When you look at Antifa -- these are violent people. 

You have tremendous power. You were saying, in this room, you have people who preach to almost 200 million people. Depending on which Sunday we're talking about. 

You have to hopefully get out and get people to support us.  If you don't, that will be the beginning of ending everything that you've gotten.  The polls might be good, but a lot of them say they are going to vote in 2020, but they're not going to vote if I'm not on a ballot.  I think we're doing well, I think we're popular, but there's a real question as to whether people are going to vote if I'm not on the ballot. And I'm not on the ballot.

I just ask you to go out and make sure all of your people vote. Because if they don't -- it's November 6 -- if they don't vote, we're going to have a miserable two years and we're going to have, frankly, a very hard period of time.  You're one election away from losing everything that you've gotten.  Little thing: Merry Christmas, right? You couldn't say 'Merry Christmas.'

White House Dinner With Evangelicals

AP reports on a dinner at the White House last night with evangelical Christian leaders:

President Donald Trump says the government’s “attacks on communities of faith” are over as he hosts a dinner celebrating evangelical Christian leaders at the White House.

Trump says the government in recent years has tried to undermine religious freedom, but those days are over.

He’s pointing to efforts by his administration to secure the release of imprisoned pastors and limit federal funding for abortion providers.

UPDATE: Here is the full text of the President's remarks.

Suit Challenges Ban On On Town's Rental of Space For Worship Services

A suit was filed yesterday in a South Carolina federal district court against Edisto Beach challenging the Town's rule change that prohibits renting space in the town's Civic Center for religious worship services.  The complaint (full text) in Redeemer Fellowship of Edisto Island v. Town of Edisto Beach, South Carolina, (D SC, filed 8/27/2018), contends that the ban violates the First and 14rh Amendments.  ADF issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.

Archbishop Calls For Pope's Resignation Over Cover-Up of Abuse

In a letter (full text) dated August 22, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, who served as apostolic nuncio in Washington D.C. from 2011 to 2016, has leveled charges against senior clerics and Pope Francis himself in the cover-up of sex abuse charges against Archbishop Theodore McCarrick. (See prior related posting.) As reported by the National Catholic Register:

In an extraordinary 11-page written testament, a former apostolic nuncio to the United States has accused several senior prelates of complicity in covering up Archbishop Theodore McCarrick’s allegations of sexual abuse, and has claimed that Pope Francis knew about sanctions imposed on then-Cardinal McCarrick by Pope Benedict XVI but chose to repeal them.

In the letter, Archbishop Vigano concludes:

Pope Francis must be the first to set a good example for cardinals and bishops who covered up McCarrick's abuses and resign along with all of them.

Burning In Effigy Does Not Violate Ban In India On Mock Funerals

In Jadaun v. State of Upper Pradesh, (Allahabad High Court, Aug. 9, 2018), a trial court in India held that the burning in effigy of a living person by protesters does not violate the statutory ban on participation in a mock funeral ceremony.  LiveLaw reports on the decision.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Tihamer Toth, Competition and Democracy, (Versenytükör, 2017. V. issue, pp. 68-82).
• Ralph R. A. Janik, How Many Divisions Does the European Court of Human Rights Have? Compliance and Legitimacy in Times of Crisis, (20 Austrian Review of International and European Law (2018/2015) 125).
• Charles A. Sullivan, Clergy Contracts, (Employee Rights and Employment Policy Journal, Forthcoming).
• David W. Opderbeck, Christian Thought and Property Law, (Forthcoming, Christian Thought and Private Law, Cambridge University Press).
• Phil Lord, Scientology's Legal System, (August 15, 2018).
• Richard Albert, David Landau, Pietro Faraguna & Šimon Drugda, The I·CONnect-Clough Center 2017 Global Review of Constitutional Law, (Published by the Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy (2018)).
• Dara E. Purvis, The Constitutionalization of Fatherhood, (August 15, 2018).
• Erica Goldberg, 'Good Orthodoxy' and the Legacy of Barnette: FIU College of Law Symposium on the 75th Anniversary of West Virginia V. Barnette, (Forthcoming, FIU Law Review).
• Ihsan Yilmaz & Zahid Shahab Ahmed, Islam and Women Rights in Pakistan, (August 9, 2018).

From SmartCILP:

• Leonard Hammer, Cultural Heritage Protection and Sacred Spaces: Considering Alternative Approaches from Within the Human Rights Framework, 49 Columbia Human Rights Law Review 73-113 (2018).
• Allan W. Vestal, "In the Name of Heaven, Don't Force Men to Hear Prayers": Religious Liberty and the Constitution of Iowa, 66 Drake Law Review 355-451 (2018).
• Chelsea M. Baltes, Book Note. God and the Illegal Alien, United States Immigration Law and a Theology of Politics by Robert W. Heimburger, 32 Georgetown Immigration Law Journal 237-245 (2018).
• Perspectives: How Cultural and Religious Diversity Affect Alternative Dispute Resolution. Franco Shapiro, moderator; Marcelo Rosadilla, Sukhsimranjit Singh, Marcio Vasconcellos, panelists, 18 Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal 497-508 (2018).
• Mark Strasser, Free Exercise and Comer: Robust Entrenchment or Simply More of a Muddle?, [Abstract], 52 University of Richmond Law Review 887-922 (2018).

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Saif'ullah v. Cruzen, Smith v. Cruzen, and Smith v Albritton  (9th Cir., Aug. 22, 2018), the 9th Circuit, in separate opinions, affirmed the dismissal of claims related to a prison's interruption of congregational prayer.

In Pevia v. Bishop, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139541 (D MD, Aug. 16, 2018), a Maryland federal district court dismissed a Native American inmate's complaint that while he was in maximum security he was not able to attend religious services.

In Blair v. Raemisch, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138796 (D CO, Aug. 16, 2018), a Colorado federal district court adopted in part a magistrate's recommendations (2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139806, July 26, 2018) and dismissed an inmate's complaint about the religious vegan diet that was being served.

In Anderson v. Russell, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141296 (ED WA, Aug. 20, 2018), a Washington federal district court dismissed a complaint by a Christian inmate whose requests to receive special Passover meals were denied.

In Jones v. Malin, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141892 (SD NY, Aug. 21, 2018),  New York federal district court refused to grant summary judgment to defendants in an inmate's suit for monetary damages for Sing Sing's two month interruption in separate Shi'a Jumu'ah services.

In Tyler v. Ray, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142354 (D SC, Aug. 22, 2018) a South Carolina federal district court adopted a magistrate's report (2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142732, July 26, 2018) and dismissed a complaint by a Jehovah's Witness civil detainee that he was not permitted to take his Bible and literature with him from his cell to recreation, and that there were limits on his ability to meet with outside religious volunteers and to receive books. UPDATE: The court's amended order is at 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 155969, Sept. 12, 2018.

In Allen v. Echele, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143953 (ED MO, Aug. 23, 2018), a Missouri federal district court dismissed a pretrial detainee's complaint that he was denied a kosher diet.

Irish State Funded Catholic Schools Can No Longer Admit With Religious Preferences

CNN today reports on the change in school admission policies in Ireland that take effect this school year.  Some 90% of state-funded primary schools in Ireland are Catholic.  In the past, they have given priority to children who have been baptized as Catholic.  This has led some parents to have their children baptized only so they can be admitted into a high quality school.  In July, the Irish parliament passed a law prohibiting this favoritism