Wednesday, July 16, 2014

President Hosts Annual White House Iftar Dinner

On Monday night, President Obama hosted the annual White House Iftar dinner in honor of Ramadan.  In his remarks (full text) he said in part:
Tonight we reaffirm a simple truth.  Fundamental to the character of our country is our freedom of religion -- the right to practice our faith as we choose, to change our faith if we choose, or to practice no faith at all and to do all this free from fear of.  All of us are deserving of an equal opportunity to thrive -- no matter who we are, what we look like, what we believe, or how we pray.  And all of us have an obligation to do our part -- to help others overcome barriers, to reverse the injustice of inequality and to help more of our fellow citizens share in the promise of America. 
The President then made specific mention of three guests at the dinner who began projects to help young people succeed.

The White House also released a list of members of Congress, local officials and members of the diplomatic corps who would be attending the dinner.

UPDATE: According to July 17 Haaretz, this year's White House Iftar dinner was unusually controversial. The presence of Israel's ambassador along with those from other countries with large Muslim populations, his Tweet from the dinner, and President Obama's remarks about Israel rankled some Muslims.

In Kenya, Catholic Bishops Accused of Evicting Restaurant Because It Is Run By Muslims

Standard Digital reported yesterday on a lawsuit filed in Narobi, Kenya against the Kenya Conference of Catholic Bishops.  The suit alleges that last December plaintiff, the Alyusra Restaurant, signed a 6-year lease on space in a building owned by the bishops' organization, but that the restaurant owner Baakai Maalim was violently ejected and the premises padlocked when the bishops learned that the restaurant was being run by Somali Muslims. Plaintiff's petition contends that the ejection constitutes "a brazen violation of the Constitution by the Catholic bishops who should be at the forefront of preaching religious tolerance...."

5th Circuit: Designs of Specialty Plates Are Private Speech Protected By 1st Amendment; Cert. Filed On Similar Issue

In Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans, Inc. v. Vandergriff, (5th Cir., July 14, 2014), the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals held, in a 2-1 decision, that messages on state specialty license plates are private speech, not government speech.  The majority went on to conclude that the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles Board engaged in unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination when, because many members of the public found the design offensive, it rejected a vanity plate design that included the Confederate flag. The New Orleans Times-Picayune reports on the decision.

Meanwhile, ADF announced that a petition for certiorari (full text) was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court last Friday in Berger v. American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina. In the case, the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, finding that messages on vanity plates are private speech, held that North Carolina engaged in unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination when it specifically authorized a "Choose Life" specialty license plate and refused to issue a pro-choice specialty plate. (See prior posting.)

Religious- Civil Rights Groups Urge Obama To Exclude Religious Exemption In Planned LGBT Order

Following on a similar letter from constitutional law scholars earlier this week, yesterday a coalition of 69 religious and civil rights organizations sent a letter (full text) to President Obama urging him to reject calls for a religious exemption in his planned executive order to bar LGBT discrimination by federal contractors. The letter argues, in part:
Religious freedom is one of our most cherished values, a fundamental and defining feature of our national character. It guarantees us the freedom to hold any belief we choose and the right to act on our religious beliefs within certain limits. It does not, however, provide organizations the right to discriminate using taxpayer dollars. When a religiously affiliated organization makes the decision to request a taxpayer-funded contract with the federal government, it must play by the same rules as every other federal contractor.
[Thanks to Michael Lieberman for the lead.] 

IRS Adopts New Short Form For Applications By Small Charities

The Internal Revenue Service announced on July 1 that it has adopted a new Form 1023-EZ that will streamline the process of applying for 501(c)(3) status for small non-profit and religious groups. The new form is only 3 pages long, instead of the 26-page long form.  It will be available to most charities with gross receipts of $50,000 or less and assets of $250,000 or less. The new form must be filed electronically. In an interview with Time earlier this week, Internal Revenue Service Commissioner John Koskinen says the change will allow the IRS to clear up the 66,000-application backlog that it faces.

Tuesday, July 15, 2014

Religious College That Expelled Transgender Student Not Covered By Unruh Act

In Cabading v. California Baptist University, (CA Super. Ct., July 11, 2014), a California trial court held that a private religious college did not violate California's Unruh Civil Rights Act when it expelled Domainlor Javier Cabading, a pre-operative male-to-female transgender person who had been admitted to the school on a merit scholarship. The University claimed Cabading committed fraud by applying for admission as a female. The court held that the private Southern Baptist school is not a "business establishment", and so is not covered by the state anti-discrimination law. However the school's ancillary programs that are open to the public-- its library, counseling center, and retail businesses such as restaurants operating on school property-- are "business establishments" covered by the Act. The court awarded plaintiff $4000 in damages for her exclusion from these programs. The Riverside County Press-Enterprise reports that the school is considering appealing the portion of the decision that went against it. MSNBC and Transgender Workplace Law & Diversity blog also report on the decision.

7th Circuit: Indiana Must Allow Secular Humanists To Solemnize Marriages

In Center For Inquiry, Inc. v. Marion Circuit Court Clerk, (7th Cir., July 14, 2014), the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals held that Indiana's statute specifying who may solemnize marriages unconstitutionally discriminates among religious and ethical beliefs.  It allows religious officials of various religious groups to perform marriages, but not equivalent officials of secular groups like humanist societies. Also, unlike some states, Indiana law does not give humanist officials the option of officiating by becoming notaries. The court instructed the district court to issue an injunction allowing certified secular humanist celebrants to solemnize marriages without risk of criminal penalty. Religion News Service reports on the decision.

Challenge To School's Policy On Distributing Materials Dismissed As Moot

In Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. v. Orange County School Board, (MD FL, July 3, 2014), a Florida federal district court dismissed as moot a complaint (see prior posting) that the Orange County, Florida school board refused to allow plaintiffs to distribute certain material critical of the Bible and religion under the school's limited public forum policy.  Subsequently the school board reversed its decision and allowed plaintiffs to distribute the disputed material; however plaintiffs failed to avail themselves of the opportunity to do so. Courthouse News Service reports on the decision.

Constitutional Law Profs Oppose Religious Exemption In Obama's Planned LGBT Non-Discrimination Executive Order

Yesterday 54 faculty members from top law schools around the country sent a letter (full text) to President Obama opposing the call earlier this month by faith leaders for a broad religious exemption in the President's planned executive order on LGBT discrimination by federal contractors. (See prior posting.) The law professors' joint letter reads in part:
As scholars of religious liberty and constitutional rights, we write to urge you to refrain from including religious exemption language in any executive order providing nondiscrimination guarantees for LGBT employees of federal contractors. Contrary to the counsel you have received from others, such an exemption is not required by the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), or accommodations of religious liberty in other federal non-discrimination laws, including Title VII. Indeed, the proposed exemption would be unprecedented. Including such a provision in newly expanded rights for LGBT employees of federal contractors would at once undermine workplace equity for LGBT employees, relegate LGBT protections to a lesser status than existing prohibitions against discrimination, and allow religious employers to create or maintain discriminatory workplaces with substantial public funding.
According to a press release, the scholars' letter was spearheaded by Columbia Law School's new Public Rights/ Private Conscience Project.

Town of Greece Board Will Hear Secular Invocation Tonight

While the U.S. Supreme Court's decision last month in Town of Greece v. Galloway validated the existing invocation policy of the New York town involved (see prior posting), in a sense things are changing in Greece.  According to Justice Kennedy's description of the town's policy:
[Town] leaders maintained that a minister or layperson of any persuasion, including an atheist, could give the invocation. But nearly all of the congregations in town were Christian; and from 1999 to 2007, all of the participating ministers were too.
The American Humanist Association has announced that at tonight's Town Board meeting, for the first time a "secular invocation" will be delivered.  As reported last month by Religion News Service, tonight's invocation will be offered by Dan Courtney, a member of the Atheist Community of Rochester, NY, located nearby. Courtney says his invocation will stress that government needs to represent all the people regardless of religious belief. The American Humanist Society has compiled a list of individuals around the country available to deliver invocations that do not call on a "supernatural entity" for guidance.

Monday, July 14, 2014

Tunisian Authorities Closing Down Restaurants During Ramadan

Al-Monitor reported yesterday that in Tunisia, for the fourth year in a row police are conducting raids forcing restaurants to close down during Ramadan.  It is unclear what legal authority they have to take this action, though some are pointing to  a circular issued in 1981 by the Prime Minister and canceled two days later by the head of state.

French Court Suspends Municipal By-Law Banning Religious Symbols At Beach

In France, last Saturday a Versailles Administrative Court suspended, pending a final ruling on the merits, a by-law adopted by the town of Wissous that banned wearing of religious symbols on the town's beach. AFP reports that the prior week, Wissous Mayor Richard Trinquier, invoking the by-law, had turned away two mothers wearing hijabs (Muslim headscarves) who had brought their children to the beach. This led to an emergency court action being brought by the French government and an organization that combats Islamophobia, in which they argued that the by-law infringes the fundamental freedom of religious belief.  The mayor had claimed that the by-law protects France's commitment to secularism.

Ohio Enacts Released Time Program, Effective In September

This weekend, the Cleveland Plain Dealer carried op-ed columns supporting and opposing Ohio House Bill 171 (full text) which was signed into law by the governor last month. (Legis. status report.) The law, which will go into effect in September, allows school districts to approve "released time" programs during which students can be excused from school to attend a program of religious instruction elsewhere. High school students can earn up to two units of course credit for participation in a released time offering.  No public funds or school personnel may be used in the religious instruction.

Recent Articles of Interest

From SSRN:
From SSRN (Islamic Law):
From SmartCILP:
  • Mark Goldfeder, The Story of Jewish Polygamy, [Abstract], 26 Columbia Journal of Gender & Law 234-315 (2014).
  • Peter T. Leeson, "God Damn": The Law and Economics of Monastic Malediction, 30 Journal of Law, Economics & Organization 193-216 (2014).
  • Marin Lim, The Sanity of Faith: What Religious Fundamentalism Teaches About the Insanity Defense and the First Amendment, [Abstract], 17 New Criminal Law Review 252-311 (2014).

Sunday, July 13, 2014

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Holland v. Goord, (2d Cir., July 10, 2014), the 2nd Circuit, reversing in part a district court's decision, held that ordering a Muslim inmate to drink water in violation of his Ramadan fast in order to provide a urine sample substantially burdened his free exercise rights.

In McCormack v. Reinke, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91356 (D ID, July 2, 2014), an Idaho federal district court dismissed for failure to prosecute a Native American inmate's complaint regarding tearing down of the prison's sweat lodge and alleged retaliation for complaining that failure to provide wood for the sweat lodge violated a previous settlement agreement.

In Villapando v. CDCR, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91965 (ED CA, July 3, 2014), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed with leave to amend an inmate's complaint that a change in allowable religious property omitted certain items necessary for Native American religious practices.

In Hines v. Illinois Department of Corrections, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92474 (SD IL, July 8, 2014), an Illinois federal district court permitted a Muslim inmate to proceed with various 1st Amendment, RLUIPA and 8th Amendment claims alleging that the vegetarian diet provided to him did not meet Halal requirements, and that he was retaliated against for complaining about non-halal turkey chili served to him.

In Mauwee v. Cox, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93241 (D NV, July 9, 2014), a Nevada federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93239, June 17, 2014) and dismissed a Native American inmate's complaint that a corrections officer desecrated his religious group's ceremonial deer antlers. Defendant mistakenly ordered the antlers to be blunted to 8 inches instead of the allowable 18 inches.

In Salas v. Gomez, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93536 (ND CA, July 9, 2014), a California federal district court permitted a Jewish inmate to proceed with his complaint that his food has been inedible and does not meet kosher standards, and that he is being denied access to Jewish scriptures.

In Baumgarten v. Maryland Division of Corrections, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93601 (D MD, July 10, 2014), a Maryland federal district court dismissed both for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and on the merits a claim by a Jewish inmate that he was denied kosher meals, and a corrections officer ripped the cover off his religious book.

In Irvin v. James, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94064 (ED CA, July 9, 2014), a California federal magistrate judge recommended permitting a Muslim inmate to proceed on his complaint that after the former chaplain left officials denied chapel access, special food for festivals, and receipt of religious packages, and delayed hiring a new Muslim chaplain.

Christian College Gets Title IX Religious Exemption For Housing Of Transgender Students

George Fox University, a Christian University with Quaker roots, reports that on May 23 the U.S. Department of Education granted it a religious exemption from the Title IX Education Amendments of 1972 relating to non-discrimination in housing and facilities. The Oregon-based school says it applied for the exemption "to preserve its right to draw on its religious convictions to handle situations related to students experiencing gender identity issues."  It adds that other colleges have received similar exemptions in the past.

The facts need to be pieced together from the University's posting, an article last Friday in PQ Monthly and an earlier report by PQ Monthly.  Apparently an African-American transgender student, who is entering his junior year, was living in female-only campus housing when the student began the medical, social and legal gender transition.  Last April the student, "Jayce M." requested to move from female-only on-campus housing to male-only on-campus housing. The University denied the request, but presented the option of living off campus with other males (conditioned on completing name and gender changes on his driver's license and Social Security records) or living on campus in a single room.

As Jayce M prepared to appeal the school's denial of male on-campus housing to the Department of Education as a violation of Title IX's anti-discrimination provisions, the school applied for the Title IX exemption and was granted it in an unusually speedy two-months. On the basis of the newly-granted exemption the Department of Education earlier this month closed Jayce M's appeal. His lawyer says that they now plan to appeal the Department of Education's ruling.

Friday, July 11, 2014

Senate Democrats Propose Bill To Overrule Hobby Lobby Decision

On Wednesday, Senators Patty Murray and Mark Udall announced that they have introduced the "Protect Women's Health From Corporate Interference Act" (full text) (summary). The bill is designed to overrule the Supreme Court's recent Hobby Lobby decision by excluding Affordable Care Act requirements from the provisions of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.  The bill provides in part:
(a) ... An employer that establishes or maintains a group health plan for its employees ... shall not deny coverage of a specific health care item or service with respect to such employees (or dependents) where the coverage of such item or service is required under any provision of Federal law or the regulations promulgated thereunder....
... Subsection (a) shall apply notwithstanding any other provision of Federal law, including Public Law 103–141 [Religious Freedom Restoration Act].
According to The Hill, the Senate Bill has 35 co-sponsors.

UPDATE: In a July 16 vote, the Senate failed to invoke cloture so it could move to consideration of the bill. The vote, largely along party lines, was 56-43.  Sixty votes are required to invoke cloture.

Canadian Trial Court Awards Damages Against Religious Order In Sex Abuse Class Action

According to Canadian Press, a Quebec trial court ruled yesterday that the Catholic order of priests, the Redemptorist Order, is liable in a class action to all sexual assault victims who attended Saint-Alphonse Seminary in Quebec City between 1960 and 1987. Nine priests are also named in the suit, but 6 of them are dead and the other 3 say they are living in poverty.  Under the court's verdict, each victim will receive at least $75,000, and some will receive $150,000.  So far, 70 former students have have filed alleging they were abuse victims.

Supreme Court Rejects Attempt By County Clerk To Appeal Pennsylvania Same-Sex Marriage Decision

As reported by SCOTUS Blog, on July 9 U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito denied an application for a stay filed by a Pennsylvania clerk of courts.  The applicant was seeking to intervene in a lawsuit decided by a district court in order to appeal the district court's invalidation of Pennsylvania's ban on same-sex marriage. State officials had declined to appeal.  The Supreme Court's docket entry in Santai-Gaffney v. Whitewood denying the application to intervene cited  the Court's denial of a stay last month in an attempt by the National Organization for Marriage to intervene to appeal the invalidation of Oregon's same-sex marriage ban.

Non-Religious Non-Profit Sues To Challenge Contraceptive Coverage Mandate

In another permutation of the challenges to the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage mandate, a federal lawsuit was filed earlier this week by March for Life. The complaint (full text) in March for Life v. Burwell, (D DC, file 7/7/2014), alleges that while plaintiff is a non-profit pro-life organization that opposes providing certain contraceptive coverage to its employees, it does not qualify for the "accommodation" that permits an opt out in favor of coverage directly from the insurance company because March for Life does not hold itself out as a "religious organization." The complaint goes on to allege that the mandate violates the religious freedom rights of March for Life employees by requiring them to accept insurance plans that provide coverage for abortifacients. It also claims that the mandate violates its equal protection rights and the Administrative Procedure Act. ADF issued a press release on the case.