Here are some important law-and-religion news stories from around the web:
- A gunman open fired at a Pittsburgh synagogue during Sabbath services this weekend, killing 11 people and wounding several others before being taken into custody.
- The Kenai Peninsula Borough Assembly began its last meeting with a religious invocation despite an Alaska Superior Court holding, in a lawsuit brought by the ACLU, that the practice violates the Alaska Constitution’s Establishment Clause.
- The Seventh Circuit heard oral argument in a case presenting the question whether an income tax housing exemption for clergy members violates the Equal Protection Clause.
- The DOJ filed a brief with the Supreme Court arguing that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 does not protect transgender workers.
- Japan’s high court affirmed a lower court decision that Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s visit to the Yasukuni Shrine in 2013 did not violate the country’s constitution.
- A federal judge in Houston dismissed a lawsuit brought by conservative Christians, which sought to prevent a local public library from hosting “Drag Queen Story Hour” events.
- The European Court of Human Rights ruled that defamatory statements about the Islamic prophet Muhammad are not covered by free speech protections.
- The Arizona State Board of Education plans to revise its social science and history curricula standards to further advance the teaching of evolution and climate change.
- Ireland passed a referendum to remove the prohibition of blasphemy from its constitution.
- Mexican legislators introduced a bill to legalize abortion across the country, where it remains a federal crime.
There are far, far better reports of the ECtHR judgment in ES v Austria – and with mixed opinions – than the one on Fox News, which over-simplifies the judgment. Try, for example:
Rosalind English, UK Human Rights Blog: ‘Criminal fine for discussion of Mohamed’s wives did not interfere with freedom of expression – Strasbourg’: https://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2018/10/26/criminal-fine-for-discussion-of-mohameds-wives-did-not-interfere-with-freedom-of-expression-strasbourg/
Simon Perfect, Theos: ‘Q: Have European judges just banned defamation of the Prophet Muhammad? A: No.’: https://www.theosthinktank.co.uk/comment/2018/10/26/q-have-european-judges-just-banned-defamation-of-the-prophet-muhammad-a-no
Matthew Scott, BarristerBlogger: ‘The ECtHR has not created a European blasphemy law but it has produced a lamentable judgment.’: http://barristerblogger.com/2018/10/27/the-ecthr-has-not-created-a-european-blasphemy-law-but-it-has-produced-a-lamentable-judgment/.