Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

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.
Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

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.
Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

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.
Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

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.
Posted on by L&R Forum

Legal Spirits 053: Tom Berg on Religious Liberty in a Polarized Age

A protester calling for justice for Elijah McClain clashes with a member of the Proud Boys in Denver, Colorado, U.S., November 21, 2020. REUTERS/Kevin Mohatt

Welcome back! In our first Legal Spirits episode of the academic year, we interview our friend, law professor Tom Berg (University of St. Thomas) about his new book, Religious Liberty in a Polarized Age. We explore how fights about religious liberty both reflect and contribute to the deep social division in the US today–but also how a commitment to religious liberty might help ease that division. Listen in!

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

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.
Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

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).
Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

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

  • In The Satanic Temple, Inc. v. City of Boston, a Massachusetts federal district court affirmed Boston City Council’s refusal to invite a representative of The Satanic Temple (“TST”) to deliver an invocation. The court did not find evidence of discrimination against TST based on its religious beliefs, citing evidence that the councilors typically invited community-involved speakers serving their constituents, a qualification TST did not meet. While the court acknowledged the potential for abuse due to lack of formal written policy on selecting invocation speakers, it maintained that “the lack of a formal, written policy does not by itself create a constitutional problem.”
  • In Children of the Kingdom v. Central Appraisal District of Taylor County, a Texas state appellate court affirmed a $32,000 property tax assessment against a religious organization that did not apply for a tax exemption. The court rejected the organization’s claim that the exemption application requirement violated their First Amendment rights, stating it was a neutral and generally applicable requirement designed to maintain equality and uniformity in the property tax system.
  • In Salado v. Roman Catholic Diocese of El Paso, a Texas state appellate court determined that the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine prevented the court from ruling on whether funds raised by parishioners to construct a new church were improperly used by the diocese. The diocese had chosen to merge the parish with another and transfer the $1.4 million in funds to the new joint parish. The court stated: “To resolve the dispute… would require this Court to interpret Canon Law and policies of the Roman Catholic Church regarding the rights and authority of bishops regarding the patrimony of a parish. Churches have a fundamental right “to decide for themselves, free from state interference, matters of church government[.]”
  • A lawsuit was filed in Oklahoma state court challenging the state’s Virtual Charter School Board’s approval of a state-funded, Catholic-sponsored charter school, St. Isidore’s. The plaintiff alleges that St. Isidore’s operation would violate the Oklahoma Constitution, Charter Schools Act, and Board regulations, particularly on grounds of religious discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, and non-compliance with nonsectarian requirements.
  • A law mandating the display of the national motto, “In God We Trust“, in all public school classrooms across Louisiana has taken effect with the start of the new school year. Democrat Gov. John Bel Edwards signed the House Bill 8 into law, which passed without any opposition in the Republican-led state Senate and House of Representatives. The legislation applies to public post-secondary institutions as well.
  • Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has signed a law to change the date of Christmas celebrations from January 7, followed by the Russian Orthodox Church, to December 25. As stated in an attached explanatory note, this move is part of an effort to “abandon the Russian heritage” and align more with Ukrainian traditions and holidays. The law also adjusts the dates for two other Ukrainian patriotic holidays.
  • Ilya Solkan, a priest in a small village near Kyiv, Ukraine, was expelled by his parishioners for introducing politics into his pastoral care and expressing support for Kremlin’s policies. Solkan belongs to the branch of the Orthodox Church tied to the Russian Orthodox Church in Moscow, which is seen by many Ukrainians as a symbol of Russian influence. Amid escalating tensions due to war, Ukraine is experiencing a growing rejection of the church’s Moscow-linked arm, and more than 1,500 local churches have switched allegiance to the Ukrainian national church. Solkan, now unemployed and ostracized, continues to hold services at his home and is attempting to regain his position through a lawsuit. Meanwhile, the villagers have welcomed a new priest from Ukraine’s national church.


Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

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

  • The 9th Circuit heard oral arguments in Catholic Healthcare International, Inc. v Genoa Charter Township, Michigan, a RLUIPA case stemming from the organization’s construction of religiously symbolic structures on a property without the Township’s approval, contrary to the Township’s instruction that such construction would be classified as a special land use requiring specific approval.
  • In Kariye v. Mayorkas, a California Federal District Court dismissed a case brought forward by three Muslim plaintiffs who claimed their rights were violated by religious questioning at US ports of entry. Rejecting the plaintiffs’ Establishment Clause and Free Exercise claims, the court cited “historical practices” at the border and “maintaining border security” as compelling government interests.
  • Suit was filed in a Pennsylvania federal district court on behalf of two parochial school students and their parents challenging a school district policy that allows home school and charter school students to participate in the district’s extracurricular and co-curricular activities but does not allow private and parochial school students to do the same. The plaintiffs argue that the exclusion of religious parochial schools infringes on their free exercise and equal protection rights.
  • In In re Matyas v. Board of Education, a New York trial court dismissed a teacher’s objections to the Department of Education’s refusal to exempt her from its Covid vaccine mandate. The teacher, citing her Catholic faith and recent conversion to an unspecified Evangelical Protestant sect, argued that her religious beliefs prevented her from receiving any vaccination. The court ruled that she failed to demonstrate that the city’s vaccine mandate was based on religion or that her views on vaccinations were an established doctrine in either Catholicism or Evangelical Protestantism.
  • In a historic Vatican trial, prosecutor Alessandro Diddi is defending his charges against 10 figures, including Cardinal Angelo Becciu, over alleged financial crimes. The trial exposes the alleged misuse of the Pope’s funds in speculative investments, such as a $390 million London real estate venture. Cardinal Becciu is additionally accused of misappropriating Vatican funds for personal use and paying ransom fees.
  • Iraqi security forces dispersed protesters seeking to reach the Danish Embassy in Baghdad, following reports of a Quran being burned in Denmark. The incident follows similar protests at the Swedish Embassy, which was set alight due to a planned Quran burning in Stockholm. Despite Denmark’s Foreign Minister condemning the act as an attempt to create division, he notes that burning religious books is not a crime in Denmark.
Posted on by Mark Movsesian

A New Collection of Essays on COVID and Religious Communities

A number of us in law-and-religion have written on what the courts’ (and the Court’s) response to COVID reveals about American church-state law, and free exercise law in particular. Here is a new collection of essays from Temple University Press on what COVID reveals about the politics and sociology of religion in the United States: An Epidemic among My People: Religion, Politics, and COVID-19 in the United States. The editors are Paul A. Djupe (Denison University) and Amanda Frieden (University of Western Ontario). Here’s the publisher’s description:

The pandemic presented religion as a paradox: faith is often crucial for helping people weather life’s troubles and make difficult decisions, but how can religion continue to deliver these benefits and provide societal structure without social contact? The topical volume, An Epidemic among My People, explains how the COVID-19 pandemic stress tested American religious communities and created a new politics of religion centered on public health. 

The editors and contributors consider how the virus and government policy affected religion in America. Chapters examine the link between the prosperity gospel and conspiracy theories, the increased purchase of firearms by evangelicals, the politics of challenging public health orders as religious freedom claims, and the reactions of Christian nationalists, racial groups, and female clergy to the pandemic (and pandemic politics). As sharp lines were drawn between people and their governments during this uncertain time, An Epidemic among My People provides a comprehensive portrait of religion in American public life.