After Policy Change, Court Dissolves Injunction Forcing Carrying of Anti-Islam Bus Ads

As previously reported, in April a New York federal district court granted a preliminary injunction to a pro-Israel advocacy group requiring the New York Metropolitan Transit Authority to accept the group's anti-Islam ad for display on the back of New York City buses. The controversial ad declared that "killing Jews" draws Muslims closer to Allah. The MTA responded to the court order by changing its policy and barring all ads of a political nature.  Now in American Freedom Defense Initiative v. Metropolitan Transit Authority, (SD NY, June 19, 2015), the federal district court granted the MTA's motion to vacate the preliminary injunction, finding that the new policy has rendered the preliminary injunction moot.  The court said in part:

In this case, the only conduct that the Court previously enjoined as unconstitutional was the defendants’ exclusion of the Killing Jews ad under the “incitement of violence” standard.  The defendants are now only excluding the Killing Jews ad under the New Policy banning political ads, a policy they assert that they have no plans of revising.... Thus, the defendants have ceased the conduct that the Court identified as unconstitutional....

[I]t is likely that the MTA’s exclusion of all political ads has converted its advertising space from a designated public forum to a limited public forum or a nonpublic forum.

Raw Story reports on the decision. [Thanks to Steven H. Sholk for the lead.]

Muslim Groups Denounce Anti-Islamist Ads That Will Appear on NYC Busses and Subway Stations

AlJazeera reported yesterday that Muslim groups are denouncing a series of six anti-Muslim, anti-Jihad ads that will appear on 100 New York buses and two subway entrances for the next four weeks, saying they equate all Muslims with extremism.  The ads, which reportedly cost some $100,000, were purchased by the American Freedom Defense Initiative, a group led by Pamela Geller. Five of the ads are pictured on AFDI's website.  One of the ads focuses on ISIL's radicalization of Westerners; another equates CAIR with Hamas; two others focus on promotion of anti-Christian and anti-Jewish views by Islamic countries; and one call Jihadists savages and urges support for Israel. An MTA spokesman says that court decisions (see prior posting) make it clear that under the First Amendment it must accept the ads unless they provoke violence or interfere with operations (which one proposed ad did).

New York MTA Ban On Ads That Demean Religious Groups Violates 1st Amendment

In American Freedom Defense Initiative v. Metropolitan Transit Authority, (SD NY, July 20, 2012), a New York federal district court held unconstitutional the provision in the standards for the sale of ad space on New York City buses that prohibits ads which demean a religious group. AFDI wanted to buy ad space on the tails of 318 NYCTA buses to run an ad reading: "In Any War Between the Civilized Man and the Savage, Support the Civilized Man. Support Israel. Defeat Jihad."  The court held that advertising space on exterior of buses is a designated public forum in which content based restrictions are subject to strict scrutiny. The MTA policy at issue which precludes ads that demean an individual or group on account of "race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, gender, age, disability or sexual orientation" was seen to be content based: "as presently worded, [it] overtly differentiates among speech based on the target of the speech's abuse and invective." The New York Times reports on the decision. [Thanks to Steven H Sholk for the lead and to Fairness blog for posting the decision.]

Philadelphia Transit System Must Accept Anti-Muslim Ad

In American Freedom Defense Initiative ("AFDI") v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, (ED PA, March 11, 2015), a Pennsylvania federal district court granted a preliminary injunction requiring Philadelphia's transit system to accept a controversial anti-Muslim ad on its buses.  AFDI sought to purchase space for an ad that reads in part: "Islamic Jew-Hatred: It’s in the Quran." The ad pictures Adolph Hitler meeting with an Arab leader.  SEPTA had rejected the ad under its policy to prohibit: "Advertising that tends to disparage or ridicule any person or group of persons on the basis of race, religious belief, age, sex, alienage, national origin, sickness or disability." The court held, however, that this is an unconstitutional content-based restriction on speech in a designated public forum. It added:

[I]t is clear that the anti-disparagement standard promulgated by SEPTA was a principled attempt to limit hurtful, disparaging advertisements. While certainly laudable, such aspirations do not, unfortunately, cure First Amendment violations.

AP reports on the decision.

Preliminary Injunction Forces Bus System To Accept Ads From Anti-Jihad Group

In American Freedom Defense Initiative v. Suburban Mobility Authority for Regional Transportation ("SMART"), (ED MI, March 31, 2011), a Michigan federal district court granted a preliminary injunction preventing the bus system in four southeastern Michigan counties from rejecting anti-jihad ads that plaintiff sought to place on buses.  According to a press release from the Thomas More Law Center, the ads read: "Fatwa on your head? Is your family or community threatening you? Leaving Islam? Got questions? Get Answers!" SMART rejected the ads under its policy that prohibited, among others, political ads or ads that are likely to hold any group up to scorn or ridicule. The court held that while it is likely that the bus advertising space  is a non-public forum, the restriction is unconstitutional because "there is nothing in the policy that can guide a government official to distinguish between permissible and impermissible advertisements in a non-arbitrary fashion."

2016 Republican Platform on Religious Liberty

Yesterday the Republican Party at its national convention adopted its 2016 Platform (full text).  This is the first in a series of posts that will focus on Platform provisions dealing with moral values and religious liberty. Note that the excerpt continues after the jump. Here is the Platform's lengthy section on Religious Liberty:

The Bill of Rights lists religious liberty, with its rights of conscience, as the first freedom to be protected. Religious freedom in the Bill of Rights protects the right of the people to practice their faith in their everyday lives. As George Washington taught, “religion and morality are indispensable supports” to a free society. Similarly, Thomas Jefferson declared that “No provision in our Constitution ought to be dearer to man than that which protects the rights of conscience against the enterprises of the civil authority.” Ongoing attempts to compel individuals, businesses, and institutions of faith to transgress their beliefs are part of a misguided effort to undermine religion and drive it from the public square. As a result, many charitable religious institutions that have demonstrated great success in helping the needy have been barred from receiving government grants and contracts.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Sarah M. Fallon, Respecting American Muslims and Shari'a Law: Maintaining Comity within American Jurisprudence, (Boston College International and Comparative Law Review, Vol. 35, 2012).
• Carl H. Esbeck, Religion During the American Revolution and the Early Republic, (Silvio Ferrari, ed., Law & Religion, Ashgate Publishing Co., U.K., 2013).
• Frederick Mark Gedicks, Ironies of Hosanna-Tabor, (Mercer Law Review, Forthcoming).
• András Koltay, Europe and the Sign of the Crucifix: On the Fundamental Questions of the Lautsi and Others v. Italy Case, (January 15, 2012).
• Shruti Chaganti, Why the Religious Freedom Restoration Act Provides a Defense in Suits by Private Plaintiffs, (October 2, 2012).
• Paul A. Lombardo, Return of the Jukes: Eugenic Mythologies and Internet Evangelism, (Journal of Legal Medicine, Vol. 33, 2012).
• Jeremy G. Mallory, Prophetic Speech, (August 24, 2012).
• David Allen Larson and Chang Wang, Preparing to Negotiate in a Globally Diverse Environment: An Examination of Chinese and Jewish Perspectives on Truth and Lies, (Hamline Journal of Public Law and Policy, Vol. 33, No. 2, 2012).
• John D. Haskell, Divine Immanence: The Evangelical Foundations of Modern Anglo-American Approaches to International Law, (11:3 Chinese Journal of International Law 429, 2012).
• Ebrahim Moosa, Translating Neuroethics: Reflections from Muslim Ethics, (Science and Engineering Ethics no. 18 (2):1-10, 2012).

From SmartCILP:

• Jean L. Cohen, The Politics and Risks of the New Legal Pluralism In the Domain of Intimacy, [Abstract], 10 I.Con: International Journal of Constitutional Law 380-397 (2012).
• Katheryn M. Dutenhaver, Mediating the Religious Upbringing Issue in Divorce Cases, 12 Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal 397-413 (2012).
• Cecile Laborde, State Paternalism and Religious Dress Code, [Abstract], 10 I.Con: International Journal of Constitutional Law 398-410 (2012).
• Julieta Lemaitre, By Reason Alone: Catholicism, Constitutions, and Sex in the Americas, [Abstract], 10 I.Con: International Journal of Constitutional Law 493-511 (2012).

Petitioners Support Military Chaplains Praying "In Jesus Name"

Religion News Service yesterday reported that Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice, has obtained over 80,000 signatures on a petition asking President Bush to issue an executive order to allow chaplains to pray in public according to their religious beliefs. Sekulow said that currently chaplains feel "muzzled" because of developments including pending litigation and new Air Force guidelines. The Department of Defense tells chaplains to be cognizant of the pluralistic military environment. 74 members of Congress have also written the President on the issue, saying, "Praying in the name of Jesus is a fundamental part of Christian belief and to suppress this form of expression would be a violation of religious freedom." (See related prior posting.)

Rob Boston, spokesman for Americans United for Separation of Church and State said that Sekulow's petition drive is just "a fund-raising ploy". He said, "This is being portrayed as an attack on Christianity when, in fact, all we're really asking for is that the Air Force respect and accommodate all religious beliefs within its ranks and not extend preference to a group that happens to be the majority. " Sekulow, on the other hand, said, "I think it's one of the most significant issues of religious freedom in our country. You've got chaplains afraid to say 'in Jesus' name.' ... They're fighting for freedom abroad and this is a basic fundamental freedom here."

Mayor Bloomberg Lauds Religious Liberty While Others Challenge Mosque Decision

Following yesterday's vote by the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission that essentially refused to block plans to build a mosque and Islamic Center near Ground Zero, New York mayor Michael Bloomberg, in view of the Statue of Liberty and surrounded by religious leaders on Governors' Island, praised the Commission's decision and gave an impassioned defense of the American tradition of religious liberty. Here are some excerpts, but the full text is worth reading:

Of all our precious freedoms, the most important may be the freedom to worship as we wish. And it is a freedom that, even here in a City that is rooted in Dutch tolerance, was hard-won over many years. In the mid-1650s, the small Jewish community living in Lower Manhattan petitioned Dutch Governor Peter Stuyvesant for the right to build a synagogue – and they were turned down. In 1657, when Stuyvesant also prohibited Quakers from holding meetings, a group of non-Quakers in Queens signed the Flushing Remonstrance, a petition in defense of the right of Quakers and others to freely practice their religion..... In the 1700s, even as religious freedom took hold in America, Catholics in New York were effectively prohibited from practicing their religion – and priests could be arrested. Largely as a result, the first Catholic parish in New York City was not established until the 1780's.... 

This morning, the City's Landmark Preservation Commission unanimously voted not to extend landmark status to the building on Park Place where the mosque and community center are planned..... The simple fact is this building is private property, and the owners have a right to use the building as a house of worship. The government has no right whatsoever to deny that right....This nation was founded on the principle that the government must never choose between religions, or favor one over another. The World Trade Center Site will forever hold a special place in our City, in our hearts. But we would be untrue to the best part of ourselves – and who we are as New Yorkers and Americans – if we said 'no' to a mosque in Lower Manhattan.

Meanwhile, the American Center for Law & Justice, which represents a New York firefighter who survived 9-11, announced it would file a petition in state court challenging the Commission's vote as an abuse of discretion.

UPDATE: Here is the full text of the complaint in ACLJ's lawsuit challenging the Commission's decision. The case is Brown v. New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission, (Sup. Ct. NY County, filed 8/4/2010).

Sikh Group Wants Governor To Veto Oregon Workplace Religious Freedom Act

Yesterday the Sikh American Legal Defense and Education Fund wrote Oregon Gov. Ted Kulongoski, asking him to veto the Oregon Workplace Religious Freedom Act (SB 786) which was passed by the state legislature several weeks ago. (Full text of letter.) The bill generally requires employers to reasonably accommodate employees' religious practices and observances. SALDEF's concern, however, is the provision in the bill that still allows public and charter schools to prohibit teachers from wearing religious dress while engaged in the performance of duties as a teacher. This presumably would allow school districts to ban Sikh teachers from wearing their religiously-mandated dastaars (turbans). (SALDEF release.) The letter urges the governor to "veto SB 786, as proposed, and ask the Oregon legislature to approve a version of the bill that honestly and comprehensively protects religious freedom in the workplace."

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Jordan Mathews, State RFRAs: Trust Judges to Strike the Proper Balance Between Religious Freedom and Anti-Discrimination Law, (February 1, 2015).
• Leah Achor, A Historical Defense of State Protection of Private Conscience, (December 13, 2014).
• Douglas NeJaime & Reva Siegel, Conscience Wars: Complicity-Based Conscience Claims in Religion and Politics, (Yale Law Journal, Vol. 124, 2015 Forthcoming).
• Brandon Harvard Riches, Codifying Commonsense: Religious Viewpoint Antidiscrimination Acts and the Free Speech Rights They Protect, (February 3, 2015).
• Howard Kislowicz, Law, Religion, and Feeling Included/Excluded: Case Studies in Canadian Religious Freedom Litigation, (Canadian Journal of Law and Society (Forthcoming 2015)).
• Nelson Tebbe, The End of Religious Freedom: What Is at Stake?, (Pepperdine Law Review, Vol. 41, No. 963, 2014).
• Clayton Douglas Adams, Personal Foul, Roughing the Speaker: The Illusory War between the Establishment Clause & College Football, (February 4, 2015).
• Jennifer Ann Drobac & Jill L. Wesley, Religion and Employment Antidiscrimination Law: Past, Present, and Post Hosanna-Tabor, (NYU Annual Survey of American Law, Vol. 69, p. 761, 2014).
• Khaled A. Beydoun, Facing Mecca from Prison: Religious Accommodation of Muslim Prisoners Before Holt v. Hobbs, (February 7, 2015).
• Derek Joseph Goff, New Life in the First Amendment: Funeral Protest Statutes after McCullen v. Coakley, (January 31, 2015).
• Ellis Goldberg, Territorial States: Monopolies in the Market for Justice, (January 30, 2015).
• Alice Ristroph, Just Violence, (Arizona Law Review, Vol. 56, 2014).

From SmartCILP:

• Antony Barone Kolenc. Not "For God and Country": Atheist Military Chaplains and the Free Exercise Clause, 48 University of San Francisco Law Review 395-456 (2014).
• Inaugural Themed Issue: Faith-Based Legal Systems. Articles by Mohamed A. Arafa and David L. Johnston. 24 Indiana International & Comparative Law Review 859-920 (2014).

Many New Articles Of Interest Have Recently Appeared

From American Political Science Association:
Carolyn M. Warner & Manfred W. Wenner, Religion and the Political Organization of Muslims in Europe, (Perspectives on Politics, Sept. 2006).

From SSRN:
Tanya Marie Johnson, The Defense of Marriage Act and the Establishment Clause , (April 21, 2006).

From Bepress:
Jennifer Kreder, Undoing the Native American Graves and Repartriation Act, (September 6, 2006).

Elisabeth D. Reid, The Faith Based and Community Initiative and the Challenge Posed by the Establishment Clause, (September 9, 2006).

Andrew Koppelman, Conscience, Volitional Necessity, and Religious Exemptions, (September 15, 2006).

Kojo Yelpaala, Legal Consciousness and Contractual Obligations, (September 19, 2006).

From SmartCILP:
Adlia Abusharaf, Women in Islamic Communities: The Quest for Gender Justice Research, 28 Human Rights Quarterly 714-728 (2006).

Waheeda Amien, Overcoming the Conflict Between the Right to Freedom of Religion and Women's Rights to Equality: a South African Case Study of Muslim Marriages, 28 Human Rights Quarterly 729-754 (2006).

Nora O'Callaghan, Lessons from Pharaoh and the Hebrew Midwives: Conscientious Objection to State Mandates As a Free Exercise Right, 39 Creighton Law Review 561-639 (2006).

Daniel J. Rosenthal, Charitable Choice Programs and Title VII's Co-religionist Exemption, 39 Creighton Law Review 641-665 (2006).

Panel: The History, Religion, and Philosophy of American Exceptionalism. Articles by Claes G. Ryn, Joseph Boyle, William T. Cavanaugh and Charles J. Reid, Jr. 3 University of St. Thomas Law Journal 211-310 (2005).

Hawaii Federal Court Rejects RFRA Claims In 2 Cannabis Cases

This week the Hawaii federal district court rejected Religious Freedom Restoration Act claims in two separate marijuana cases:

United States v. Christie, (D HI, Dec. 30, 2013), involves a motion in limine in the prosecution of Roger Christie, the founder and leader of The Hawaiian Cannabis Ministry, and Sherryanne L. St. Cyr, an ordained minister in the THC Ministry, who are charged with manufacturing, distributing and possessing marijuana.  In one opinion (full text) the court held that Defendants had established a prima facie case for raising a Religious Freedom Restoration Act defense.  In a second opinion issued the same day (full text), the court held the government had established a compelling interest in enforcing the Controlled Substances Act against defendants to prevent diversion of substantial amounts of marijuana to non-adherents of the church. Finding also that the prosecution is the least restrictive means to further that compelling interest, the court held that defendants ultimately are not entitled to present a RFRA defense at trial.

In Oklevueha Native American Church of Hawaii, Inc. v. Holder, (D HI, Dec. 31, 2013), the court dismissed a suit brought by the Native American Church of Hawaii and its founder Rex "Raging Bull" Mooney seeking a declaratory judgment decreeing that criminal prosecution under the federal Controlled Substances Act for consuming, cultivating, possessing or distributing of cannabis would violate plaintiffs' free exercise of religion in violation of RFRA. The court said in part:

No reasonable juror could infer, from what is presently in the record, that Mooney’s religion is anything more than a strongly held belief in the importance or benefits of marijuana. Even if this belief is sincerely held, and even if marijuana use is indeed beneficial, the court cannot conclude from the record that a reasonable juror could find that Plaintiffs’ belief is religious in nature....

Even if the evidence in the record did support the existence of a religion,... a reasonable juror could not conclude that the prohibition on cannabis constitutes a substantial burden on Plaintiffs’ alleged religion..... Mooney himself describes peyote as his religion’s “primary sacrament,” and lists a litany of other drugs his Church members use. Nothing in the record explains why relying on these other drugs instead of cannabis would be more than an inconvenience for Plaintiffs.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Benjamin Schonthal & Tom Ginsburg, Setting an Agenda for the Socio-Legal Study of Contemporary Buddhism (Introduction), (Asian Journal of Law and Society 3:1-16 (2016)).
• Levi Cooper, Culpability for Curses in Jewish Law and Mystical Lore, (Wizards vs. Muggles: Essays on Identity and the Harry Potter Universe, ed. Christopher E. Bell (Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2016), 168-193).
• Netta Barak Corren, Beyond Dissent and Compliance, (Oxford Journal of Law and Religion, Forthcoming).
• Dimitry Gegenava, Some Technical and Legal Problems of the Constitutional Agreement, (Journal of Law, No. 1, 2016).
• Nelson Tebbe, Religious Freedom in an Egalitarian Age (Introduction), (N. Tebbe, Religious Freedom in an Egalitarian Age, Harvard University Press, 2017).
• Helge Årsheim, Religion and International Organizations, (In Ian Hurd, Ian Johnstone, and Jacob Katz Cogan (eds), The Oxford Handbook of International Organizations. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 490-507 (2016)).
• Ioana Cismas, The Child's Best Interests and Religion: A Case Study of the Holy See's Best Interests Obligations and Clerical Child Sexual Abuse, (Elaine E. Sutherland and Lesley-Anne Barnes Macfarlane (eds.) Implementing Article 3 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child: Best Interests, Welfare and Well-Being (Cambridge University Press, 2016), pp. 310-325).
• Dipayan Chowdhury & Atmaja Tripathy, Recognizing the Right of the Third Gender to Marriage and Inheritance Under Hindu Personal Law in India, (Chowdhury D., Tripathy A. Recognizing the Right of the Third Gender to Marriage and Inheritance under Hindu Personal Law in India. BRICS Law Journal. 2016;3(3):43-60).
• Michael Boucai, Is Assisted Procreation an LGBT Right?, (Wisconsin Law Review, Vol. 2016, No. 6, 2016).
• Jud Campbell, Republicanism and Natural Rights at the Founding, (32 Constitutional Commentary 85 (2017)).
• Mohamed A. Arafa & Ahmed El-Ashry, Gender Equality in the Arab and Muslim World: Whither Post-Revolutionary Egypt?, (Gender Equality in a Global Perspective (Routledge Advances in Management and Business Studies, Chapter 3, London & New York, 2017)).

From SmartCILP and elsewhere:

• Justice Barbara A. Jackson, Called to Duty: Justice William J. Gaston, 94 North Carolina Law Review 2051-2096 (2016).
• Gregory A. Mark, Hobby Lobby and Corporate Personhood: Taking the U.S. Supreme Court's Reasoning at Face Value, 65 DePaul Law Review 535-558 (2016).
• Sukhsimranjit Singh, Religious Arbitration and Its Struggles with American Law & Judicial Review, 16 Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal 360-406 (2016).
• Dr. Isha Ann Emhoff, Ellen Fugate & Nir Eyal, Is There a Moral Right to Nonmedical Vaccine Exemption?, 42 American Journal of Law & Medicine 598-620 (2016).
• Lidiya Mishchenko, In Defense of Churches: Can the IRS Limit Tax Abuse by “Church” Impostors?, 84 George Washington Law Review 1361 (2016).

Recent Articles and Books of Interest

From SSRN:

• Robert Eli Rosen, Samson the Judge: Religion and Violence in Milton's SAMSON AGONISTES, University of Miami Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2009-09, March 6, 2009).

From SmartCILP:

• Celine Abramschmitt, The Same-Sex Marriage Prohibition: Religious Morality, Social Science, and the Establishment Clause, 3 Florida International University Law Review 113-186 (2007).
• Mark W. Cordes, Religion as Speech: The Growing Role of Free Speech Jurisprudence in Protecting Religious Liberty, 38 Southwestern Law Review 235-286 (2008).
• Jay Michaelson, Chaos, Law, and God: The Religious Meanings of Homosexuality, 15 Michigan Journal of Gender & Law 41-119 (2008).
• Yuval Sinai, The Doctrine of Affirmative Defense in Civil Cases--Between Common Law and Jewish Law, 34 North Carolina Journal of International Law & Commercial Regulation 111-178 (2008).

Recent Books:

• Thomas F. Farr, World of Faith and Freedom: Why International Religious Liberty is Vital to American National Security, (Oxford Univ. Press, 2008).
• David Novak, In Defense of Religious Liberty, (ISI Books, 2009).
• Stephen Spector, Evangelicals and Israel: The Story of American Christian Zionism, (Oxford Univ. Press, Nov. 2008).

Group Seeks Records of Contacts Between DOD and Mikey Weinstein

Judicial Watch, a conservative advocacy group, announced last month that it has filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking all records of communications between the Department of Defense and Mikey Weinstein, founder of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation.  Weinstein has been active in opposing Christian proselytization in the military. (See prior posting.) Explaining the lawsuit, Judicial Watch President Tom Finton said:

The American people deserve to know the full truth about just how close the relationship is between anti-Christian activist Mikey Weinstein and the Obama Department of Defense. There is increasing intolerance for the First Amendment rights of traditional Christians in today's military.

Recent Articles and Books of Interest

From SSRN:

• Konstantinos G. Margaritis, The Freedom of Religion and its Limits in Greece and the Netherlands: A Comparative Approach, (December 15, 2009).
• Justin R. La Mort, The Soundtrack to Genocide: Using Incitement to Genocide in the Bikindi Trial to Protect Free Speech and Uphold the Promise of Never Again, (Interdisciplinary Journal for Human Rights Law, Vol. 4, Forthcoming).
• Michael James O'Connor, Legitimate Defense of Civil Rights or Raw Congressional Power Grab? The Constitutionality of the Freedom of Choice Act, (October 28, 2009).
• Stephen Matthew Feldman, Divided We Fall: Religion, Politics, and the Lemon Entanglements Prong, (First Amendment Law Review, Vol. 7, 2009).

From SmartCILP:

• Nicole C. O'Neal, The Development of Islamic Finance in America: The Future of Islamic Real Estate Investment Trusts, 44 Real Property, Trust & Estate Law Journal 279-297 (2009).

New Books

• Dawinder S. Sidhu & Neha Singh Gohil, Civil Rights in Wartime: The Post 9/11 Sikh Experience, (Ashgate Publishing Group, Dec. 2009).
• Lake Lambert III, Spirituality, Inc.: Religion in the American Workplace, (NYU Press, Dec. 2009).
• Stig Jarle Hansen, Atle Mesoy, and Tuncay Kardas (eds.), The Borders of Islam: Exploring Samuel Huntington’s Faultlines from Al-Andalus to the Virtual Ummah, (Columbia University Press, Nov. 2009).

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:

• Jerg Gutmann, Causes of Corruption in Religious Organizations, (October 19, 2012).
• Caroline Mala Corbin, The Contraception Mandate, (Northwestern University Law Review Colloquy, Vol. 106, Forthcoming).
• Charlton C. Copeland, Creation Stories: Stanley Hauerwas, Same-Sex Marriage, and Narrative in Law and Theology, (Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 75, No. 4, 2012).
• Frederick Mark Gedicks, With Religious Liberty for All: A Defense of the Affordable Care Act's Contraception Coverage Mandate, (American Constitution Society for Law and Policy Issue Brief, Oct. 18, 2012).
• Menachem Mautner, Religion in Politics: Rawls and Habermas on Deliberation and Justification, (Hanoch Dagan, Yedidia Z. Stern and Shachar Lifshitz eds., The Israel Democracy Institute, 2013).
• Wassim Rajhi, Islamic Finance, Distress and Restructuring: Lessons from Asian Financial Crises, (October 17, 2012).
• Roberta Rosenthal Kwall, Is the Jewish Tradition Intellectual Property?, (4 WIPO Journal, Forthcoming).

From SmartCILP:

• Rex Ahdar, Regulating Religious Coercion, [Abstract], 8 Stanford Journal of Civil Rights & Civil Liberties 215-243 (2012).
• Yaseen Eldik and Monica C. Bell, The Establishment Clause and Public Education in an Islamophobic Era, [Abstract], 8  Stanford Journal of Civil Rights & Civil Liberties 245-258 (2012).
• Mary Ann Glendon, Harold J. Berman Lecture. Religious Freedom--A Second-Class Right?, 61 Emory Law Journal 971-990 (2012).
• Myriam Hunter-Henin, Why the French Don't Like the Burqa: Laicite, National Identity and Religious Freedom, [Abstract], 61 International & Comparative Law Quarterly 613-639 (2012).
• John Witte, Jr. and Don S. Browning, Christianity's Mixed Contributions to Children's Rights: Traditional Teachings, Modern Doubts, 61 Emory Law Journal 991-1014 (2012).

Recent Articles and Books of Interest

From SSRN:

• Richard W. Garnett, Judicial Enforcement of the Establishment Clause, (Constitutional Commentary, Forthcoming).
• Abner Greene, Three Theories of Religious Equality...and of Exemptions, (Texas Law Review, Vol. 87, No. 963, 2009).
• Simon Butt, Polygamy and Mixed Marriage in Indonesia: Islam and the Marriage Law in the Courts, (in Indonesia: Law and Society, T. Lindsey, ed., Federation Press, 2008).
• Thomas Charles Berg, Religious-School Financing and Educational Pluralism in the American Tradition, (Rivista Antonianum, 2009).
• Gregory A. Kalscheur, Conscience and Citizenship: The Primacy of Conscience for Catholics in Public Life, (Journal of Catholic Social Thought, Vol. 6, No. 2, Summer 2009).
• Jessica Knouse, From Identity Politics to Ideology Politics, (Utah Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Michael Kent Curtis, Be Careful What You Wish For: Gays, Dueling High School T-Shirts, and the Perils of Suppression, (Wake Forest Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Nelson Tebbe, Excluding Religion: A Reply, (University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 157, 2009).

From Bepress:

• Rahma Hersi, A Value Oriented Legal Theory for Muslim Countries in the 21st Century: A Comparative Study of Both Islamic Law and Common Law Systems, (Cornell Law School Graduate Student Papers Series, Paper 29, April 2009).

From SmartCILP:

• Kyle Duncan, Misunderstanding Freedom from Religion: Two Cents on Madison's Three Pence, 9 Nevada Law Journal 32-62 (2008).
• Gene R. Nichol, Establishing Inequality, (Reviewing Martha C. Nussbaum, Liberty of Conscience: In Defense of America's Tradition of Religious Equality.) 107 Michigan Law Review 913-930 (2009).
• Bishop Thomas J.Paprocki, Address. Annual Meeting of the National Diocesan Attorneys Association, As the Pendulum Swings from Charitable Immunity to Bankruptcy, Bringing It to Rest with Charitable Viability, 48 Journal of Catholic Legal Studies 1-18 (2009).
• Joshua Foster, Prophets, Cartoons, and Legal Norms: Rethinking the United Nations Defamation of Religion Provisions, 48 Journal of Catholic Legal Studies 19-57 (2009).
• Harry G. Hutchison, Work, the Social Question, Progress and the Common Good? (Reviewing Recovering Self-Evident Truths: Catholic Perspectives on American Law, edited by Michael A. Scaperlanda and Teresa Stanton Collett), 48 Journal of Catholic Legal Studies 59-116 (2009).

Recent Books:

• Daniel O Conkle, Constitutional Law: The Religion Clauses, Second Edition, (Foundation Press, 2009), excerpts on SSRN.
• Steven P. Miller, Billy Graham and the Rise of the Republican South, (Univ. of Pennsylvania Press, March 2009), reviewed in the New York Times.

AU Calls For IRS To Investigate Colorado Christian Organization

Americans United announced last week that it has filed a complaint (full text of letter) with the Internal Revenue Service asking it to investigate the Ridgway, Colorado based Ridgway Christian Center for violating tax code limitations on non-profit organizations. The letter points to a magazine distributed by Ridgway (a project of Praise Him Ministries) to Colorado residents:

Please note the cover of the publication. It is dated Fall 2012 and contains a photo of a series of American flags. The headline reads, “Honor God! Love your country! VOTE REPUBLICAN!”

Inside the publication, Victoria Hearst, founder and president of the ministry, writes a long article challenging the right of the Internal Revenue Service to prohibit tax exempt organizations from endorsing or opposing candidates for public office. The articles relies heavily on material produced the Alliance Defending Freedom (formerly the Alliance Defense Fund), an Arizona-based organization that every year sponsors an event called “Pulpit Freedom Sunday,” during which pastors are urged to openly violate the law by endorsing or opposing candidates from the pulpit.