Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

Here are some important law-and-religion stories from around the web:

  • Yeshiva University recently settled a protracted lawsuit with a student-led LGBT group by granting it formal recognition as a student organization, allowing it access to campus facilities and university funding. The lawsuit arose from the school’s refusal to recognize the group on religious grounds, whereas the group claimed such a refusal violated New York antidiscrimination statutes.
  • The state legislature of Kentucky recently passed a joint resolution directing the return of a monument displaying the Ten Commandments to the state’s Capitol Grounds. Temporarily removed during the 1980s due to construction, its return was enjoined by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, citing the now-defunct Lemon test as rendering the monument violative of the Establishment Clause. In light of recent Supreme Court jurisprudence declaring the Lemon test overruled, the state legislature voted to reinstate the monument.
  • A Catholic diocese and a Christian pregnancy center filed suit against the State of Illinois, challenging recent amendments to the Illinois Human Rights Act that prevents discrimination against employees based on their reproductive health choices. The plaintiffs allege that the amendments burden their Free Exercise rights by preventing them from making faith-based employment decisions, and coercing them to associate with individuals whose actions undermine their staunchly pro-life mission.
  • The Kansas state House of Representatives issued a condemnation against a “Black Mass” to take place on the state capitol grounds, citing its clear anti-Catholic animus and blatant disrespect to Christianity. The procession involves the use of a consecrated Catholic host, viewed as a clear mockery and distortion of the Catholic Eucharist, and an alleged affront against the religious sensibilities of “all people of good will.”
  • A New York federal district court ruled that a gender support plan that involved hiding a students social gender transition from her parents did not violate the Free Exercise or Due Process rights of her parents. The Court held that the plaintiff was free to exercise her religious and parental rights over her daughter in the household, and that a school policy that existed for the voluntary benefit of students does not endorse a religious message.
Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

Here are some important law-and-religion news stories from around the web:

  • In Royce v. Pan, a California federal court upheld the state’s repeal of the “personal belief” exemption from school vaccination requirements, rejecting claims that the law was hostile to religion. The court found that the law was neutral and generally applicable, and that the removal of the exemption did not unfairly target religious practices.
  • In Shash v. City of Pueblo, a Colorado district court rejected a Native American plaintiff’s RLUIPA and free-exercise claims after he was arrested for DUI, as he objected to a blood alcohol test on religious grounds. The court found that RLUIPA did not apply because the plaintiff was not confined to a qualifying institution, and dismissed the First Amendment claim on qualified immunity grounds, noting there was no evidence that the officers were aware of his religious beliefs or intentionally burdened his exercise of religion.
  • In Atlantic Korean American Presbytery v. Shalom Presbyterian Church of Washington, Inc., a Virginia appellate court dismissed a church property dispute, invoking the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine, which bars civil courts from intervening in religious matters. The court ruled that Shalom Presbyterian Church’s decision to seek civil court relief after previously submitting to the Presbyterian Church Synod’s authority amounted to a collateral attack on the Synod’s decision, violating constitutional principles of religious freedom.
  • Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon recently signed HB 0207, establishing the Wyoming Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), which mandates strict scrutiny of state actions that significantly burden a person’s religious exercise. Wyoming becomes the 29th state to adopt such a law.
  • Georgetown University argues that the government cannot control its DEI curriculum, citing the First Amendment and its Jesuit mission. This raises the question of whether religious freedom could protect religiously affiliated institutions from attacks on DEI practices, as faith-based colleges often defend their right to make decisions based on their religious tenets.
  • The U.S. Acting Solicitor General filed an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to overturn an Oklahoma ruling that a Catholic-sponsored charter school violated the state constitution and the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. The brief argues that the Free Exercise Clause prohibits excluding the religious school, noting that charter schools do not perform functions exclusively reserved to the state, and thus are not subject to the same constitutional constraints as government-run institutions.
    • Stay tuned for our Symposium on this case!
Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Mattone Center Participates in Law and Religion Moot Court in Rome

Last week, the Mattone Center’s student fellows–Noa Cadet, Riki Markowitz, Karina Mesrobian, and Panayiotis Xenakis, participated in the 8th International Law and Religion Moot Court Competition in Rome. The competition gathers law students from Europe and the US to argue a mock case before panels representing the US Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights. This was the first time the Mattone Center fielded a team in the competition. Congrats to our team, especially oralists Noa Cadet and Riki Markowitz, and many thanks to Jim Herschlein ’85 for helping to coach!

Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

Here are some important law-and-religion news stories from around the web:

  • Petitioners in Walke v. Walters asked the Oklahoma Supreme Court to issue an injunction barring the Oklahoma State Department of Education from distributing Bibles to classrooms in the state.
  • In Kumar v. Koester, the 9th Circuit held that Hindu professors did not have standing to oppose the inclusion of “caste” as a protected class in their university’s anti-discrimination policy.
  • The Supreme Court denied review in Hittle v. City of Stockton, California. The 9th Circuit had dismissed a religious discrimination suit brought by a city’s fire chief under Title VII.
  • Syria’s interim president signed an interim Constitution protecting freedom of belief for individuals of all religions.
  • The Federal Communications Commission has questioned Google regarding concerns that YouTube TV has been discriminating against faith-based channels on its streaming service.
Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Moschella on the New Natural Law

This month, the University of Notre Dame Press publishes an introduction what it calls the “new natural law,” Ethics, Politics, and Natural Law: Principles for Human Flourishing, by philosopher Melissa Moschella (Notre Dame). I’m in over my head here, but as I understand it, its proponents argue that new natural law theory (NNLT) integrates the three elements of goods, norms, and virtues more successfully than other approaches. Readers must judge for themselves. Here’s the description from the Notre Dame website:

The foundational principles of ethics and politics are principles that guide us to respect and promote human flourishing. In Ethics, Politics, and Natural Law Melissa Moschella provides an accessible explanation and development of the new natural law account of these principles while clarifying common misconceptions.

As a commonsense ethical theory, natural law grounds ethics in the fundamental dimensions of human flourishing. Moschella lays out the basic principles of natural law, their relationship to the virtues, and their social and political implications. Highlighting the importance of communities for flourishing, Moschella explains how this should shape our understanding of justice and the common good, and shows how natural law principles support limited government and civil liberties. She also considers the relationship between morality and God, and how natural law relates to Christian revelation. This fresh and compelling account of new natural law is the go-to resource to understand this important and influential theory.

Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

Here are some important law-and-religion news stories from around the web:

  •  In Miller v. McDonald, the Second Circuit held that New York did not violate Amish parents’ Free Exercise rights under the First Amendment when it removed a religious belief exemption from its school immunization law. The court found that the public health law in itself was generally applicable and that there was no evidence that the legislature’s decision to repeal the religious belief exemption in 2019 was motivated by anti-religious sentiment.
  • In CNS International Ministries, Inc. v. Bax, a Missouri federal district court held that a the ministerial exception did not cover a janitor and cafeteria worker at a religious organization that runs residential care facilities for children.
  • Recently, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing to address how to combat antisemitism and antireligious hate crimes in general.
  • A group of Christian Patriarchs and Heads of Churches in Jerusalem have come together to issue a public statement denouncing foreclosure proceedings initiated against the Armenian Patriarchate. The foreclosure proceedings stem from an alleged tax debt levied against the Patriarchate, originating from a municipal tax from which Christian institutions have traditionally been exempt. Christian leaders believe that if the proceedings go unchallenged, it will only lead to more expropriation of Christian assets in Jerusalem.
  • Recently, rebels from an Islamic terrorist group stormed a village in the Congo and took approximately one hundred people hostage. From those taken, seventy bodies were discovered in a Protestant church in Lubero. Sources believe that these hostages were killed when they could no longer continue to march alongside their captors.
Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Marginalized Religions in the Roman Empire

Most are familiar with the Roman Empire’s treatment of Christianity–which, the conventional account goes, was uniquely bad. But, argues classicist K.P.S. Janssen in a book out this month from Oxford University Press, Marginalized Religion and the Law in the Roman Empire, Rome marginalized other religions as well, and treated them quite similarly in legal terms. Readers can evaluate the argument for themselves. Here’s the description from the Oxford website:

The Roman Empire’s approach to religion has traditionally been described in paradoxical terms. On the one hand, Rome has often been regarded as almost proverbially tolerant, as well as highly flexible in its dealings with the diverse range of religious cults and practices within its territories. On the other hand, the Roman religious landscape was not without its limits, and there were certain groups who found themselves, for one reason or another, on the outside. The legal interactions between these groups and the Roman authorities have largely been studied in isolation. In Marginalized Religion and the Law in the Roman Empire, K. P. S. Janssen instead takes a comparative approach, and investigates how members of various marginalized religious groups were embedded in, and interacted with, the wider Roman legal system. The legal positions of private diviners, Jewish communities and early Christians are compared and contrasted to provide a broader perspective on the legal treatment of marginalized religion in the Roman world. Janssen argues that the known interactions between these respective groups and the Roman authorities are best understood within the wider context of Roman law and administration, and that they furthermore shared a number of important characteristics. While the treatment these groups received was certainly not in all respects identical, the procedural, socio-political, and ideological mechanisms that underpinned the relevant legal measures were nonetheless conspicuously similar.