Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

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

  • In Rizzo v. New York City Department of Sanitation, a federal district court in New York allowed a sanitation worker’s Title VII failure-to-accommodate claim, based on anti-vaccination beliefs, to proceed, rejecting the city’s argument that the objections were not religious. The court also permitted the worker’s claim that the city failed to engage in cooperative dialogue under New York City Human Rights Law.
  • LifeWise, Inc., a Christian group that provides religious education to public school students, sued a parent for allegedly infringing on the group’s copyrighted curriculum. The parent is accused of fraudulently gaining access to and publishing LifeWise’s internal documents and curriculum on a website opposing the organization.
  • A New York court dismissed cross claims by two Kingsborough Community College faculty members who alleged the school retaliated against them for their anti-Israel views after being sued by Jewish faculty members for a hostile work environment. The court found no evidence of retaliatory actions by the school and stated the school had no duty to prevent the plaintiffs’ discrimination and antisemitism complaints.
  • Oklahoma’s state superintendent, Ryan Walters, directed all public schools to include Bible teachings, including the Ten Commandments, in their curriculums, stating such teachings are essential for historical and cultural understanding, without specifying grade levels. It is unclear if the superintendent has the authority to issue this directive under Oklahoma law.
  • President Biden announced the appointment of Dr. Mohamed Elsanousi to the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom. Dr. Elsanousi, Executive Director of the Network for Religious and Traditional Peacemakers, has been influential in promoting vaccine equity and religious freedom in Muslim-majority communities.
Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Religious Freedom & National Security

Before states established religious freedom as a constitutional principle, they saw it as a matter of diplomacy and national security. “Cuius regio eius religio” was meant to keep peace among nations, not so much within them. And religious freedom continues to figure in international relations today–though, sadly, religious freedom is often honored more in words than deeds. A new collection of essays from Routledge, Security, Religion, and the Rule of Law: International Perspectives, argues that national security depends on states’ honoring the religious freedom of their own citizens. The editors are Tania Pagotto (University of Milan-Bicocca), Joshua Roose (Deakin University) and G.P. Marcar (University of Otago). Here’s the description from the publisher’s website:

Security, Religion, and the Rule of Law argues that true, substantive, and sustainable national security is only possible through respect for the rule of law, human rights, and religious freedom.

Despite the emphasis on national security and the war on terror that has preoccupied governments for over two decades, nations – and the world – seem to be more divided than ever, with a concomitant impact of increasing the risk of terrorism and religious and political violence. The national security paradigm, previously reserved primarily for foreign threats, has been turned increasingly inwards, focusing on a state’s own citizens as potential threats. This is often along religious lines, threatening fundamental human freedoms. This book provides a series of critical engagements on some of the most pressing issues at the interface of religion and security today, including proposing a deeper engagement with theology when dealing with freedom of religious belief, exploring a better understanding between domestic peace and international relations, abiding by the rule of law while countering terrorism, and developing a broader understanding of identities and of the nature of citizenship. It provides the resources to further reflect upon and address these topics, as well as stimulate further discussions on religion and security matters across a range of different disciplines. Wide-ranging case studies consider Australia, China, Europe, the Kurdish people, Nigeria, Russia, Ukraine, the United Nations, and the United States.

This book will appeal to students and scholars across a range of disciplines, including international relations, law, philosophy, political science, religious studies, security studies, and theology. It will also appeal to human rights lawyers, judges, NGO researchers, governmental agency specialists, and policy makers.

Posted on by L&R Forum · 1 Comment

Legal Spirits 060: Memorial Day, the Knights of Columbus, and the National Park Service

Poplar Grove National Cemetery, Petersburg, Virginia

In this episode, Center Director Mark Movsesian interviews religion journalist Kelsey Dallas about the controversy that arose last month when the National Park Service refused to allow the Knights of Columbus to celebrate an annual Memorial Day Mass at a national cemetery in Virginia. The Park Service said it was enforcing the rules against “demonstrations”; the Knights said the refusal violated the group’s religious freedom. Who was right? And what does this controversy reveal about church-state relations in an increasingly secular America? 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 stories from around the web:

  • In French v. Albany Medical Center, the Northern District of New York found that a hospital did not violate the religious rights of a nurse who refused to receive a flu shot on religious grounds. The Court held that the requested accommodation was not reasonable due to her proximity to flu patients and vulnerable individuals.
  • In Bacon v. Woodward, the Ninth Circuit reversed the dismissal of a suit by firefighters who claimed their free exercise rights were infringed by the City of Spokane’s refusal to accommodate their religious objections to the COVID-19 vaccine. The Court held that the city’s termination of the plaintiffs while inviting potentially unvaccinated firefighters from neighboring departments for assistance constituted more favorable treatment for a secular group.
  • In Blackmon v. State of Missouri, a Missouri trial court held that the references to God and the belief that life starts at conception do not translate into various pro-life statutes running afoul of the Establishment Clause. The Court likened the mention of God to that found in the State’s Constitution, and refused to consider the latter belief as religious.
  • In Russia, a self-proclaimed witch was detained in court after disseminating literature calling for violence against clergy of the Russian Orthodox Church. She was also charged with insulting the feelings of religious believers as well as distributing extremist literature.
  • In Pakistan, a Christian man was killed by a mob of hundreds of individuals after being accused of desecrating a Quran. The United States Center for International Religious Freedom claims that the attack was inspired by Pakistan’s blasphemy laws, which explicitly provide for the death penalty upon anyone found to insult the Islamic faith.
Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

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

  • In Carter v. Local 556, Transport Union Workers of America, the Fifth Circuit stayed an order by a Texas District Court ordering attorneys to attend 8 hours of religious liberty training by a Christian non-profit. The attorneys were responsible for firing an employee after she espoused religiously-motivated pro-life content on her personal social media accounts.
  • Three Jewish students of UCLA sued the university for failing to protect its Jewish student population from campus unrest and discrimination in violation of federal law. The complaint alleges that Jewish students have been effectively banned from large segments of the campus informally called the “Jewish Exclusionary Zone”, and that the university has failed to act in the face of widespread antisemitism.
  • In St. Mary’s Catholic Parish in Littleton v. Roy, a District Court in Colorado ruled that the State could not refuse to exempt faith-based preschools from complying with a policy against discrimination on the basis of sexual identity while also allowing congregational-based preschools to prefer their own members. The Court criticized the policy for effectively allowing preschools to discriminate based on church membership, while simultaneously failing to allow these same schools to dictate their own admission standards.
  • A Vermont couple filed suit against the state over a policy that mandated all foster parents unconditionally demonstrate their ability to assent to a child’s potential desire to dress, cut their hair, or act in any way according to their stated gender identity. The couple claimed that the policy violated their Free Speech and Religious Liberty Rights by forcing them to act and speak in a way inconsistent with their beliefs.
  • In Oklahoma, the State Legislature has enacted a bill requiring schools to offer a released-time course dedicated to religious teaching and moral instruction for up to three class-periods per week. The courses would be taught by an independent entity outside of school grounds and grades would be evaluated using secular criteria.
Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

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

  • In Wallbuilder Presentations v. Mark, a D.C federal court granted a preliminary injunction against the removal of advertisements on a public bus that indicated that the American founders were Christians. The Court found that a local transit guideline banning advertisements that attempt to influence the public on controversial issues was unreasonable and susceptible to the biases of those overseeing its enforcement.
  • In Jane Does 1-11 v. Board of Regents of the University of Colorado, the 11th Circuit found that a policy granting religious exemptions for vaccinations only to certain religions violated the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses. The Court rejected the university administration’s decision that only adherents of religions that expressly prohibit all immunizations may claim an exemption, holding that a government policy cannot use its own views of a belief’s legitimacy to judge whether it is sincerely held.
  • In Foothills Christian Ministry v. Johnson, a California federal court rejected a complaint by three churches against California’s Child Day Care Facilities Act which required all preschools to make acts of religious observation discretionary by the student’s parents. Because the Act allowed all registrants to reject the admission of any child whose parents refuse to allow their children to participate, the Court held that the plaintiffs lacked a cognizable injury.
  • In Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany v. Vullo, the NY Court of Appeals rejected a claim that the state’s religious exemption for mandatory coverage of medically necessary abortion was too narrow. The Court held that the state’s four-element test for qualification as a religious employer was generally applicable and therefore not subject to strict scrutiny, despite the alleged hardship of meeting the four elements.
  • A nondenominational church challenged a zoning objection made by the Town of Castle Rock, Colorado against the church’s use of an RV as temporary shelter for the homeless. The complaint alleges that the aforementioned objection violates the plaintiff’s Free Exercise Clause rights, citing multiple passages from Christian Scripture that mandate believers to tend to the homeless and hungry.
Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

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

  • In Farrakhan v. Anti-Defamation League, a New York federal district court dismissed a complaint alleging that the Anti-Defamation League violated Farrakhan’s First Amendment Rights by repeatedly referring to him and his organization as antisemitic. In the dismissal, the Court reasoned that Farrakhan failed to allege that his injuries were concrete or traceable to the ADL.
  • The City of New York has agreed to settle a class action damage claim brought by Muslim women protesting a policy that required wearers of hijabs to remove them when sitting for arrest photos. The NYPD agreed to change the policy in an earlier settlement in 2020, and the settlement amounts to $17.5 million.
  • In Citizens United to Protect Our Neighborhoods v. Village of Chestnut Ridge, New York, the Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a complaint challenging a new zoning law that allowed places of worship to be more easily built, claiming that the law improperly promoted religion. The Court reasoned that the plaintiffs lacked standing, suffering no cognizable harm apart from tax dollars passing the law.
  • In United States v. Safehouse, a Pennsylvania district court held that the prosecution of a nonprofit providing safe injection sites for drug users did not violate the Free Exercise Clause. Despite the leaders of the nonprofit claiming religious motivation, the entity itself has no religious affiliation, and the Court therefore held that the religious inspiration of its leaders doesn’t protect it against prosecution for the violation of a federal statute criminalizing the maintenance of drug-involved premises.
  • In Ocean Grove, New Jersey, the NJ State Department for Environmental Protection ordered the Christian nonprofit owners of the waterfront area to allow beach access to the public on Sunday mornings or face up to $25,000 in fines per day. State officials claim that the closure violates the Coastal Area Facilities Review Act, which itself is based on the public-trust doctrine, outlining that certain natural goods like waterfront areas are to be reserved for public use.
Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Making American Religion Moderate

At the Law & Liberty site this morning, I review a new documentary on the history of religious freedom in America, “Free Exercise.” The film shows how minority religious communities–Catholics, Mormons, and others–have changed America over time. But, I argue, America has changed minority religions as well. Here’s an excerpt:

ike the Quakers, who went from being bottle-breaking radicals to sober citizens, Catholics and Mormons themselves changed in ways that made them less threatening to the American majority. One major point of contention between the Catholic Church and the wider American society had to do with religious liberty itself. The nineteenth-century Church was the Church of the Syllabus of Errors (1864), a papal document that condemned freedom of conscience and the separation of church and state as dangerous heresies. America’s Protestant majority saw this document and the values it espoused as hostile to fundamental American commitments. In the 1928 campaign, The Atlantic published an open letter questioning whether a Catholic like Smith could serve as president, citing the Syllabus and other papal pronouncements on church and state.

A hundred years later, though, and largely through the efforts of American Catholics like Fr. John Courtney Murray, the Second Vatican Council adopted Dignitatis Humanae, a document that specifically endorses religious liberty as a civil right. Catholic scholars have argued that Dignitatis Humanae and the Syllabus of Errors can be interpreted consistently with one another and that, from a theological perspective, there was no change. However theologians understand the situation, though, after Dignitatis Humanae, something had indeed changed as a practical matter. A major point of tension between the Catholic Church and American culture had disappeared, largely because of American influence.

Or consider the LDS Church. A primary source of conflict between Mormons and the wider American society in the nineteenth century had to do with plural marriage, the issue in cases like Reynolds and Davis. In 1890, however, the LDS Church officially ended the practice—making it possible for Utah to be admitted as a state six years later. Practically speaking, Mormonism changed in a way that made it much less threatening to the wider American public. Mormons conformed to social convention, and relations between the LDS Church and other Americans have been better ever since.

What causes religions in America to move toward the mean over time? Some argue that the Lockean ideology that underlies our First Amendment is designed to encourage religious moderation—to minimize religious “enthusiasms” that threaten social peace. If that’s the case, Lockeanism certainly seems to be working. Or perhaps another factor explains things. Two hundred years ago, Tocqueville wrote about the strong pressures for social conformity that exist in the United States, where he observed “little independence of mind.” Whether as a result of ideology or social norms, or both, the pattern is apparent.

You can read the full essay here.

Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

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

  • In Bardonner v. Bardonner, the Indiana Court of Appeals upheld a custody order that prohibited a father from taking his son to his church. The court held that his free exercise rights were not infringed upon by this restriction as the child’s mother, the legal guardian of the child, had the right to determine the religious upbringing of her child.
  • In Catholic Charities Bureau, Inc. v. State of Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission, the Wisconsin Supreme Court held that the Catholic Charities Bureau and four of its sub-entities were not exempted from the state’s unemployment compensation law. The court reasoned that the controlling factor for qualification was whether the charity was operated primarily for religious purposes, and held that the charity’s purposes were instead charitable and secular.
  • The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom ended an official visit to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia following a demand by Saudi officials to have USCIRF Chairman Rabbi Abraham Cooper remove his kippah while visiting a religious site.
  • In Miller v. McDonald, the District Court for the Western District of New York upheld the State of New York’s removal of religious exemptions from its mandatory student vaccination requirement. The Court held that the law was facially neutral, and the mere removal of existing religious exemptions is insufficient to prove hostility towards religion.
  • An observant Jewish passenger on a JetBlue flight filed suit against the airliner in the District Court for the Southern District of New York after being forced off the flight when he refused to sit next to a woman who wasn’t his wife or blood relative, on account of his religious beliefs.
Posted on by L&R Forum

Legal Spirits 057: Historian Richard Brookhiser on Religious Freedom in America

In this episode, Center Director Mark Movsesian interviews historian Richard Brookhiser (left) about his new documentary, “Free Exercise: America’s Story of Religious Liberty.” How have minority religions tested and shaped America’s commitment to religious freedom over the centuries–and how has America changed those religions in return? From the Flushing Remonstrance of 1657 until now, it has been a grand story. Listen in!

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS