In a TV interview last month, House Speaker Mike Johnson raised eyebrows by asserting that Framers welcomed religion in public life and that the Establishment Clause protects religion from the encroachment of government, not the other way around. In this podcast, we show how Johnson was both right and wrong. Many Framers shared his view, but others did not. The controversy over Johnson’s comments is just the latest episode in a continuing debate over the meaning of religious liberty. When we argue about the past, we are really arguing about what our country should be, today. Listen in!
Here are some important law-and-religion news stories from around the web:
In Wiggins v. Griffin, the 2nd Circuit reversed a dismissal by a district court and allowed a Baptist inmate’s lawsuit against prison officials to proceed. The inmate claimed his religious rights were violated when he couldn’t attend religious services for over five months due to a delay in updating the list of prisoners allowed to attend services.
In Schneider v. City of Chicago, an Illinois federal district court dismissed a couple’s lawsuit alleging that the city had violated Illinois’s RFRA by requiring COVID vaccinations for large gatherings, including the couple’s wedding. The court ruled that the couple hadn’t shown the city’s health order substantially burdened their religious beliefs.
The White House announced nominations for federal circuit and district courts, including Adeel A. Mangi for the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals. If confirmed by the Senate, Mangi would become the first Muslim American to serve on a federal appeals court.
In C.P. v. Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses, a New Jersey appellate court allowed a lawsuit against Jehovah’s Witnesses congregations for negligence after a woman was abused by her grandfather, who was also a church elder. Changes in state laws allowed her to sue the congregations, alleging they knew about the abuse but failed to take proper action to provide a safe environment for children.
In Cyriaque v. Director, Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, an Ohio appellate court upheld the denial of unemployment benefits to a clinical trainer who was terminated for refusing a COVID-19 vaccine despite seeking a religious exemption. The court determined that the denial was justified as the trainer’s initial exemption request did not align with her later testimony, indicating her opposition was not based on sincere religious beliefs.
A Christian school in Vermont has filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging state rules that prevent it from participating in educational programs and athletic competitions due to regulations prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. The lawsuit claims that these rules conflict with the school’s religious beliefs regarding sexuality and gender.
A Jewish doctor is suing NYU Langone after being terminated as director of its cancer research center due to his social media posts about the Israel-Hamas conflict. Dr. Neel alleges religious discrimination as his posts were linked to his Jewish identity, while NYU Langone defends its decision, citing breaches of its Code of Conduct and Social Media Policy.
Here are some important law-and-religion news stories from around the web:
In Pro-Life Action Ministries v. City of Minneapolis, a Minnesota federal district court dismissed void-for-vagueness and expressive-association challenges to a Minneapolis ordinance preventing access disruption to reproductive healthcare facilities. The court, however, allowed the plaintiff’s claims related to free speech, free exercise of religion, and overbreadth to proceed.
In Fitz-James v. Ashcroft, a Missouri state appeals court upheld a trial court’s ruling that the Secretary of State’s ballot summaries for six abortion rights initiative proposals were insufficient and unfair. The Secretary of State issued a press release criticizing the decision, stating he plans to appeal it.
The Pennsylvania legislature passed Senate Bill 84, repealing the state’s ban on public school teachers wearing religious attire or symbols in the classroom. Governor Josh Shapiro is expected to sign the bill, making Pennsylvania the last state to eliminate such a restriction, which had previously faced legal challenges on First Amendment grounds.
Louis Farrakhan filed a $4.8 billion lawsuit in the Southern District of New York against the Anti-Defamation League and the Simon Wiesenthal Center, accusing them of interfering with his activities by labeling him an anti-Semite. The complaint alleges violations of the First Amendment’s protections for freedom of association and free exercise of religion, as well as defamation claims.
The White House announced plans to develop the first National Strategy to Counter Islamophobia in the United States, citing the need to address hate-fueled attacks and discrimination against Muslims, Arabs, and Sikhs.
President Biden marked the 25th Anniversary of the International Religious Freedom Act with a statement acknowledging the rise of antisemitism, Islamophobia, and discrimination in the United States and the challenges faced by religious minority communities worldwide. He emphasized the United States’ commitment to defending religious freedom both domestically and globally.
Here are some important law-and-religion news stories from around the web:
In United States v. Harris, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals deliberated on whether a defendant, charged with threatening a federal judge and declared incompetent for trial, could be involuntarily medicated despite his religious objections as a Jehovah’s Witness. The court recognized the importance of religious liberty in this context, concluding that it could be considered a “special circumstance” in deciding the permissibility of involuntary medication, according to Supreme Court precedent in Sell v. United States.
In Foshee v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, a Maryland federal court dismissed a religious discrimination claim under Title VII by two employees seeking a religious exemption from a COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The court found that their objections, based on what plaintiffs assert was guidance from God or the Holy Spirit and personal concerns about the vaccine, were not strictly religious but intertwined with secular reasons, thus not qualifying for a religious exemption. The court emphasized that their beliefs, being “not subject to any principled limitation in…scope,” amounted to an unverifiable “blanket privilege” not strictly religious in nature.
In Hilsenrath v. School District of the Chathams, a New Jersey court reaffirmed its prior decision stating that a 7th grade curriculum on Islam did not violate the Establishment Clause. The court, after a reconsideration prompted by the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, emphasized that the educational materials were not coercively promoting religious establishments forbidden by the First Amendment, leading to a ruling in favor of the school board.
In Gospel Light Mennonite Church Medical Aid Plan v. New Mexico Office of the Superintendent of Insurance, a New Mexico federal district court declined to order an injunction that would prevent the state’s insurance superintendent from regulating Health Care Sharing Ministries (HCSMs), cost-sharing organizations intended to cut medical expenses for members. The plaintiffs argued that an official press release, which warned consumers about HCSMs and declared their plans unauthorized insurance products, showed a form of official disapproval of their religious beliefs. However, the court disagreed, and using rational basis review, found that state laws requiring compliance with the Insurance Code were justified and evinced a legitimate governmental concern.
In The Matter of James Hogue v. Board of Education of the City School District of the City of New York, the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division upheld the denial of Hogue’s request for a religious exemption from the COVID-19 vaccination mandate for New York City Department of Education employees. It ruled that Hogue failed to prove his objection was based on sincere religious beliefs and that granting an exemption would impose undue hardship on the Department of Education. The court dismissed Hogue’s other arguments, including a lack of cooperative dialogue and issues of timeliness in the appeal process.
In Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty v. Union of India, India’s Supreme Court declined to recognize same-sex marriages, aligning with government and religious leaders who opposed the petitions. The Court concurred that the power to legislate on marriage resides with the parliament, not the judiciary. The petitioners had advocated for the modification of the Special Marriage Act to be more inclusive by using the term “spouse” instead of specifying gender. Despite refusing to legalize same-sex marriages, the Court did urge the government to explore and implement extended rights and privileges for same-sex couples, suggesting the formation of a committee to examine this prospect.
Here are some important law-and-religion news stories from around the web:
A petition for certiorari was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in Reilly v. City of Harrisburg. Plaintiffs contend that a city ordinance restricting pro-life volunteers from offering one-on-one counseling near a Planned Parenthood facility violates the First Amendment by allowing certain speech within the buffer zone while banning pro-life speech.
In Brox v. Woods Hole, Martha’s Vineyard and Nantucket Steamship Authority, the 1st Circuit affirmed in part and vacated in part a trial court’s decision regarding religious vaccine exemptions due to the concern that a COVID-19 vaccine mandate policy would treat religious exemptions differently from medical exemptions.
The Department of Justice announced that a grand jury indicted an Indiana man for making death threats against the Anti-Defamation League because of the members’ religion. If convicted on all counts, the defendant could face a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000.
A settlement has been reached between the federal government and Native American tribes in Oregon over the destruction of a sacred site near Mount Hood. The settlement includes measures to protect the site with a tree or plant barrier, provide access to a quarry for ceremonial and cultural purposes, and allow the plaintiffs to rebuild a stone altar at the location.
The Kansas Attorney General wrote a letter to the 10th Circuit requesting an end to the practice of using preferred pronouns for counsel, parties, and witnesses. He argues that the practice infringes on First Amendment rights, may conflict with religious beliefs, and may reveal bias on gender identity issues in ongoing legal matters.
California Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed Senate Bill 403, which aimed to ban caste-based discrimination, citing existing laws that already prohibit discrimination based on factors such as race, color, religion, ancestry, and national origin. Critics of the bill argued that it broadly paints the Hindu and South Asian communities as discriminatory.
Had John Aroutiounian lived, he would have been a great political essayist. A graduate of Yale, where he was the speaker of the Yale Political Union (as a member of the Federalist Party), he was a student at Columbia Law School when he died of an aggressive cancer in 2019. The Abigail Adams Institute and Cluny Media have now published a posthumous collection of his writings, Finding Gold in the Dark: Reflections on Modern America, Virtue, and Faith, which display remarkable wit, insight, and eloquence, especially for so young a person. Worth reading. Here is the publisher’s description:
“A true citizen must always consider how he shall make the most of the existing materials of his country–each tradition is a potential treasure and the past is filled with gifts.”
These are not the words of some eminent statesman with the wisdom of years at his disposal; nay, they are the words of a young man but twenty-one years of age, given to a gathering at Yale University. For John Aroutiounian, fidelity to truth, elegance in style, and brilliance in wit and humor went hand in hand, as this collection of his writings so aptly shows. A prolific essayist, John wrote scores of pieces over the course of his life, engaging on matters of faith and culture, national identity and political discourse, societal disparity and religious persuasions—always, in sundry fashion, in light of the Armenian Orthodox and Roman Catholic traditions. Finding Gold in the Dark: Reflections on Modern America, Virtue, and Faith is a testament to this fact: the reflections of a conscientious, principled gentleman on the realities and aspirations of his time.
Here are some important law-and-religion news stories from around the web:
The 4th Circuit heard oral argument in Billard v. Charlotte Catholic High School to determine whether a Catholic high school violated Title VII by firing a drama teacher for entering a same-sex marriage. While the district court sided with the teacher, during the appeal, judges inquired about the ministerial exception doctrine, even though the school had not raised it as a defense.
In Gardner-Alfred v. Federal Reserve Bank of New York, a New York federal district court dismissed claims by two FRB employees who were denied religious exemptions from the bank’s COVID vaccine mandate. The court concluded neither employee showed objections based on sincere religious beliefs. The court noted one employee’s ties to the Temple of Healing Spirit seemed only to seek a vaccination exemption and another’s actions and associations were inconsistent with her claimed religious views.
In Huck v. United States, a Utah federal court dismissed challenges to Congress’ 2019 designation of public lands in Utah as wilderness areas, resulting in stricter usage rules like motor vehicle bans. Plaintiffs claimed the designation favored Earth-religions and their views on the ‘sacredness’ of lands, violating the Establishment Clause. The court emphasized historical precedent supporting federal authority over land designations and did not find evidence of religious coercion or bias against specific groups.
In Kloosterman v. Metropolitan Hospital, a Michigan federal district court declined to dismiss a physician assistant’s religious discrimination claims against a hospital that fired her for not referring gender transitioning patients based on religious beliefs. The plaintiff, citing Christian beliefs, argued that she was against “eras[ing] or alter[ing] one’s sex.” The court found she plausibly argued that her termination was due to religious beliefs but dismissed her free speech claim.
Suit was filed in Rooks v. Peoria Unified School District against the Arizona school board to defend a plaintiff’s use of Scripture during Board meeting comments. Legal counsel to the Board deemed the practice a violation of the Establishment Clause.
Israel’s Supreme Court ordered the government to clarify its inaction against Jerusalem’s Sephardi Chief Rabbi Shlomo Amar over derogatory remarks about Reform Judaism, the LGBTQ community, and the Women of the Wall Movement. Amar attributed earthquakes to the LGBTQ community and labeled Reform Jews as “evil people.” The petitioners claim they’ve sought government action 16 times in four years without response.
Here are some important law-and-religion news stories from around the web:
In López Prater v. Trustees of Hamline University, a federal district court in Minnesota refused to dismiss plaintiff’s claim that her university employer discriminated against her based on religion. Plaintiff, a professor who was disciplined for showing depictions of the Prophet Muhammad in an art class, argues that she would not have been disciplined if she had been a Muslim.
Twelve Muslim plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against 29 federal officials in a Massachusetts district court, alleging that the officials violated their federal civil rights by adding them to a terrorist watchlist under vague criteria, Plaintifs claim they were unaware of their inclusion and had no recourse to challenge or comprehend the officials’ decision.
In Mirabelli v. Olson, the Southern District of California issued a preliminary injunction to prevent adverse employment action by the Escondido Union School District against two teachers who objected on religious grounds to the district’s policy of maintaining faculty confidentiality when communicating with parents about a student’s change in gender identity. The court found that the district’s policy conflicted with the teachers’ sincere religious beliefs in accurate communication with parents and that the district’s non-disclosure to parents policy was not narrowly tailored and could potentially cause more harm than good.
Several Jewish groups have filed a lawsuit against the Santa Ana Unified School District Board of Education, alleging that the district’s ethnic studies curriculum includes antisemitic and anti-Israel content, and that the district violated the “Brown Act” by providing inadequate notice and permitting harassment during school board meetings. At one meeting, attendees reportedly made antisemitic remarks, threatened Jews and Israelis, and displayed hostility toward Jewish participants.
In 2022, a Kentucky district court found that Kim Davis, the Rowan County Clerk, violated the constitutional rights of two same-sex couples by refusing to issue them marriage licenses due to religious reasons, and a jury was tasked with determining damages. Recently, in separate trials, the jury in the case of Yates v. Davis awarded zero damages, while in the second case, Emold v. Davis, the jury granted damages totaling $100,000.
In Davis v. Wigen, the 3rd Circuit overturned a district court’s dismissal of a RFRA claim filed by a former federal inmate and his fiancée against a private prison for denying their marriage request. The court ruled that the denials, while not explicitly forcing them to violate their faith, placed a significant burden on their religious beliefs, highlighting that government actions closely related to religious practices can be considered a substantial impediment under RFRA.
Here are some important law-and-religion news stories from around the web:
In In re Parks v. Commissioner of Labor, the Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court upheld the denial of unemployment compensation to a medical center security guard who was terminated for refusing to comply with a Covid vaccine mandate. The court ruled that the state mandate did not allow for a religious exemption, and the security guard’s religious beliefs did not excuse compliance with a valid, religion-neutral law of general applicability. The court held that when employment is terminated due to noncompliance with such a law, even when the motives for noncompliance are religious in nature, the First Amendment does not prevent the denial of unemployment insurance benefits if the mandate has a “rational public-health basis” and is justified by a compelling government interest.
New York City Mayor Eric Adams announced a new initiative allowing mosques to broadcast the call to prayer on Fridays and during Ramadan without requiring a permit. The initiative comes with new legal guidance from the NYPD, emphasizing that the call to prayer is permitted in the city despite sound restrictions in neighborhoods. Mosques can now broadcast the call to prayer on Fridays from 12:30 PM to 1:30 PM and during the sunset prayers throughout Ramadan, with collaborative efforts between the NYPD Community Affairs Bureau and Muslim faith leaders to ensure compliance with noise regulations.
In Rutan-Ram v. Tennessee Department of Children’s Services, the Court of Appeals of Tennessee reversed the decision of a trial court that held a Jewish couple did not have standing to sue the Tennessee Department of Children’s Services. The couple sued because they were denied foster training by a state-subsidized child-placement agency because they did not share the agency’s religious beliefs. The court held that there was an injury in fact because the Tennessee statute that protected faith-based agencies from providing services to those that did not share their belief made it more difficult for members of one group to obtain services.
In Lax v. City University of New York, the New York Kings County Supreme Court allowed five Orthodox Jewish faculty members at Kingsborough Community College to proceed with their religious hostile work environment and retaliation claims against the school. The Jewish faculty members allege that they have been subjected to pervasive discrimination by another faculty group called the Progressive Faculty Caucus (PFC).
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in a case regarding whether, consistent with the Second Amendment, the government may prohibit firearm possession by a person with a domestic violence restraining order. The brief states that the bishops support measures that control the sale and use of firearms and make them safer.
Kentucky, Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia all signed an amicus brief supporting certiorari in a case challenging a New York law that bars counseling within a hundred feet of an abortion clinic, including on public sidewalks. The Second Circuit upheld the law based on Hill v. Colorado (2000).
Here are some important law-and-religion news stories from around the web:
In St. Augustine School v. Underly, the 7th Circuit addressed a long-standing dispute over transportation benefits for private religious schools in Wisconsin. While a state statute allows these benefits for only one school from a single organizational entity in each district, the court had previously ruled that the state Superintendent wrongfully denied St. Augustine School these benefits. However, in the latest decision, the 7th Circuit declined to address federal constitutional issues the plaintiffs raised, emphasizing that the court would not provide an advisory opinion on an unnecessary theory, and upheld the district court’s declaratory judgment without an injunction or damages.
In Spirit of Aloha Temple v. County of Maui, a Hawaii federal district court ruled in favor of the Spirit of Aloha Temple regarding their special use permit on agriculturally-zoned land for religious purposes. The court decided the state did not meet the strict scrutiny standard, but other issues, including whether the denial imposed a significant religious burden, remained unresolved. The case emphasizes that under RLUIPA, there must be evidence of intent to discriminate when regulations are neutral.
The Catholic Archdiocese of Denver and two Catholic schools filed a lawsuit in Colorado federal district court against restrictions in Colorado’s universal preschool funding program. The suit, St. Mary Catholic Parish in Littleton v. Roy, argues that the program’s conditions infringe on their free exercise and free speech rights by not allowing preference for Catholic families and imposing non-discrimination requirements that conflict with Catholic teachings. The program’s rules also challenge the schools’ stances on matters of marriage, gender, sexuality, and biological sex-based regulations.
In Chesley v. City of Mesquite, a Nevada federal district court dismissed former police chief Joseph Chesley’s lawsuit against the city and its former city manager for circulating damaging rumors about him, including to his church members. Chesley claimed that the rumors and the city’s failure to stop them violated his free exercise rights by tarnishing his reputation within his church and hindering his worship experience. The court rejected this claim, noting that the subjective harm to his reputation didn’t amount to a “substantial burden” on his religious rights.
In Cristello v. St. Theresa School, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Catholic school that terminated an unmarried art teacher who became pregnant, due to her violation of an employment agreement to abide by the teachings of the Catholic Church, which agreement prohibited premarital sex. The teacher had claimed pregnancy and marital status discrimination under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD). The court determined that the school was protected by the LAD’s exception for religious organizations, asserting that such decisions can be made using neutral principles of law without entangling courts in religious matters.
Following accusations of blasphemy against a young Christian man, a mob in Faisalabad, Pakistan, attacked multiple Christian homes and churches, setting them ablaze. The outburst of violence was triggered when torn pages from the Quran with alleged blasphemous content were found near the Christian community, leading local religious leaders to call for protests.
The Nicaraguan government has seized the University of Central America, a prominent Jesuit-run institution, alleging it to be a “center of terrorism.” This move is the latest in a series of crackdowns on the Catholic Church, opposition figures, and academic institutions by President Ortega’s regime, with over 26 Nicaraguan universities confiscated since December 2021. The widespread confiscations and expulsions, targeting churches, civic groups, and opposition members, reflect a broader erosion of democratic norms and a suppression of civil society in Nicaragua.
