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 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

New Video on Reynolds v. United States

Happy to announce the release of a new video in our YouTube series, “Landmark Cases in Religious Freedom.” The new video examines the landmark 1878 case, Reynolds v. United States, the Supreme Court’s first decision on the meaning of the Free Exercise Clause.

Through the story of George Reynolds, a devout Mormon charged with bigamy, the Court established that although the Free Exercise Clause protects religious belief absolutely, it allows the state to regulate religious conduct–at least if the state has a good reason for doing so. Learn how Chief Justice Waite’s opinion introduced Jefferson’s “wall of separation” metaphor to the Court’s caselaw and why the Court rejected religious belief as a defense to criminal charges, setting a precedent that still influences religious freedom cases today:



Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

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

  •  In People v. Johnson, a California appellate court ruled that prohibiting a criminal defendant, an ordained minister, from wearing a clerical collar and having a Bible during trial was not a reversible error. The court found that this restriction did not affect the trial’s fairness or the verdict. 
  • In Gartenberg v. The Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art, a New York federal court ruled that while Title VI must be applied consistently with the First Amendment, it still requires schools to address harassment that goes beyond protected speech. The court found that Cooper Union’s response to antisemitic intimidation, where protestors banged on a locked library door while Jewish students sheltered inside, was inadequate under Title VI, as the conduct was physically threatening and not shielded by free speech protections.
  • In Civil Rights Department v. Cathy’s Creations, Inc., a California appellate court ruled that a bakery violated state civil rights law by refusing to sell a predesigned white cake for a same-sex wedding reception. The court rejected the bakery’s free speech and religious freedom defenses, finding that its policy was facially discriminatory.
  • In Miller v. City of Burien, a Washington federal court upheld the city’s requirement that a Methodist church obtain a permit before hosting a homeless encampment on its property. The court ruled that the permit process did not substantially burden the church’s religious exercise, as the city’s request was a minor inconvenience aimed at ensuring safety.
  • In Roman Catholic Archbishop of Washington v. Doe, the Maryland Supreme Court upheld the retroactive elimination of the limitation period for filing child sexual abuse lawsuits, ruling that the General Assembly had the power to abrogate the statute of limitations.
Posted on by Mark Movsesian

In Search of Common Ground: An Upcoming Online Symposium

I look forward to participating, along with many friends and colleagues, in what promises to be a fascinating symposium on religion, secularism, and liberalism organized by Steven Heyman and Kathleen Brady and hosted by the Chicago-Kent Law Review: “In Search of Common Ground: Religion and Secularism in a Liberal Democratic Society.” The online symposium, scheduled for February 21, will be open to the public; the link is below. It’s a fabulous lineup of scholars and I’m very grateful to be among them:

Over the past several decades, America’s religious diversity has continued to grow rapidly, as have the percentages of Americans who either are not religious or are not affiliated with a specific religious group or denomination. At the same time, America’s deepening cultural and political divisions have often followed these expanding religious fault lines. These developments have raised new challenges for defining the relationship between law, religion, and secularism under the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment and beyond. At the Chicago-Kent Law Review’s Symposium, leading law-and-religion scholars who represent a broad spectrum of views will explore a range of doctrinal issues – such as free exercise exemptions, government expression and funding, and the meaning of religion under the First Amendment – and will discuss how people who hold very different worldviews can live together in contemporary society.

For more information, check the link above. Thanks!

Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

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

  • The Supreme Court granted certiorari to review an Oklahoma Supreme Court decision blocking a Catholic school from becoming a public charter school. The state court ruled that allowing a Catholic school to operate as a public charter school violated the Establishment Clause, while the school argues the decision violates the Free Exercise Clause.
    • The Mattone Center will co-sponsor a symposium on this case in April. Stay tuned for details.
  • In Bagal v. Sawant, the 9th Circuit ruled that a Hindu living in North Carolina lacked standing to challenge Seattle’s Anti-Caste Discrimination Ordinance. The court found no credible threat of enforcement for activities like ordering a vegetarian meal or wearing a Mauli thread during planned future visits to Seattle, as the ordinance does not regulate these practices.
  • In Rodrique v. Hearst Communications, Inc., the 1st Circuit upheld the dismissal of a Title VII lawsuit filed by a TV news photographer who sought a religious exemption from his employer’s COVID vaccine mandate. The court ruled that the employer successfully proved an undue hardship defense, stating it reasonably relied on scientific evidence showing that vaccinated employees are less likely to transmit COVID-19, rather than basing it on the plaintiff’s religious beliefs.
  • In Winder v. United States, a Texas federal court dismissed a negligence suit against an Army Chaplain over advice to involve law enforcement in a suicide threat, which led to a fatal confrontation. Citing the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine, the court held that deciding the case would improperly require examining the Chaplain’s religiously-informed duty of confidentiality.
  • In St. Luke’s Health System, Inc. v. State of Kansas ex rel. Schultz, the Kansas Court of Appeals held that employees seeking a religious exemption from a COVID-19 vaccine mandate only need to provide a written statement explaining how the mandate violates their sincerely held religious beliefs, emphasizing that the state statute prohibits employers from questioning the sincerity of the employee’s beliefs.
  • Harvard University has reached a settlement in a lawsuit filed last May, accusing it of tolerating antisemitic bullying and discrimination against Jewish and Israeli students in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. As part of the settlement, Harvard will adopt the IHRA definition of antisemitism for discipline, recognize Zionism as a protected category, create a dedicated position for antisemitism complaints, and implement various measures, including annual public reporting and mandatory staff training.
Posted on by Mark Movsesian

The Mattone Center Launches a YouTube Channel & Video Series

I’m delighted to announce that this month the Mattone Center has launched a new YouTube channel. The platform features diverse content, including episodes of the Legal Spirits podcast, a new video series, Landmark Cases in Religious Freedom, panels and interviews , and event highlights. The channel aims to promote engaging discussions and provide valuable insights into the intricate relationship of law and religion. 

One standout feature of the new channel is the animated series, Landmark Cases in Religious Freedom, which examines conflicts between law and religious conscience in American jurisprudence. Each video provides historical context, explains key legal arguments and court decisions, and analyzes the broader societal impact of these pivotal cases. 

The first video in the series, “People v. Philips: An Early Case About Free Exercise,” explores an early precedent from New York on the priest-penitent privilege. It has resonated strongly with viewers, amassing over 30,000 views and counting in the short time since its launch. Here it is:

The response to this first video shows that we are serving a real need. People want to understand how courts balance legal principles and religious faith. As an academic institution, the Mattone Center is uniquely positioned to provide that understanding, and YouTube, which reaches millions of people around the world, offers a new opportunity for us to do so. Scholars shouldn’t confine themselves to academic circles; we should engage with the wider world. That’s exactly what we aim to achieve with this channel.

Please consider subscribing to the channel, so you can receive updates as new material becomes available. Thanks!

Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

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

  • An insurance worker from Michigan was awarded a twelve-million dollar judgment against her former employer after she was terminated for refusing to adhere to a private mandatory-vaccination requirement on religious grounds. It seems likely that the insurance company will appeal the judgment, considering the jury’s proportionately-large award of ten-million dollars in punitive damages.
  • In Ex parte Halprin, a Texas appellate court granted a new trial to a Jewish inmate who was sentenced to death following the murder of a police officer responding to the robbery of a Dick’s Sporting Goods. The Court found that the trial judge’s decision was based in large part on antisemetism, citing various out-of-court statements brought by witnesses that showed a clear animus against the defendant’s Jewish heritage.
  • In Union Gospel Mission of Yakima, Wash. v. Ferguson, a Washington federal district court granted a preliminary injunction preventing the state of Washington from applying its antidiscrimination laws to homeless shelters run by a Christian organization. The organization sought to limit its hiring to coreligionists, while the government of Washington claims religious exemptions to antidiscrimination statutes only apply in the context of ministerial hirings.
  • In Wexler v. City of San Diego, a California federal district court rejected the claim of an Orthodox Jewish man that the City of San Diego discriminated against his exercise of religion by allowing his eviction on the Sabbath. The Court found that because the evictors were not state actors, and because state laws in place facilitating the eviction process were neutral and generally applicable, the Plaintiff’s Religious Exercise Claim must fail.
  • In Furqua v. Raak, the Ninth Circuit reinstated the free exericse and equal protection claims of a self-described Christian Israelite who was refused Kosher meals for Passover after the prison chaplain claimed that any such religious requirement for a Christian was erroneous. The Court held that because the Plaintiff was denied an accomodation based on the subjective theological assessment of the chaplain, as opposed to a neutral and valid procedural rule, a reasonable trier of fact might find that he was refused an accomodation on account of religious discrimination.
Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

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

  • In Loffman v. California, the Ninth Circuit held that California’s exclusion of Jewish schools from special-education programs violates the Constitution’s neutrality requirement. The court found that California’s policy discriminates against religious parents and schools.
  • In Tanvir v. Tanzin, on remand from the Supreme Court, the Second Circuit held that FBI agents were entitled to qualified immunity against RFRA damages claims because the Muslim plaintiffs who were put on a no-fly list had not disclosed their religious objections to serving as informants. The court found that, since the agents had no reason to know their actions violated the plaintiffs’ religious beliefs, they could not be personally liable for damages.
  • Luther Rice College and Seminary filed a complaint saying that Georgia officials are violating the Constitution by excluding its students from state financial aid programs solely because of the college’s religious mission. The lawsuit argues that this exclusion from public benefits violates the Free Exercise Clause by discriminating against religious institutions based on their religious character.
  • President Biden formally apologized for the U.S. Federal Indian Boarding School Policies (1819–1969), which aimed to assimilate Native American children. He acknowledged that over half of these schools were associated with religious organizations, and many of them subjected Native children to severe mistreatment, leaving lasting trauma across generations.
  • The Vatican and China have agreed to extend their Provisional Agreement on the Appointment of Bishops for another four years, marking the third renewal since its initial signing in 2018. This agreement has allowed bishops in China to be appointed with papal consent, fostering full communion with the Pope and resulting in about ten new bishop appointments and formal recognition of previously unrecognized bishops.