Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

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

  • In U.S. Navy SEALs 1-26 v. Austin, a Texas federal district court found the repeal of the military’s COVID vaccine mandate only partially addressed a lawsuit by Navy SEALs denied religious accommodations. The SEALs argue the mandate exposed flaws in the Navy’s religious accommodation process, including delays and discriminatory practices, which remain unaddressed. The court noted ongoing issues such as indefinite request delays, lack of individual assessments, and coercive tactics against servicemembers seeking accommodations.
  • Members of the U.S. House Freethought Caucus criticized the invitation of Pastor Jack Hibbs to deliver an opening prayer in the House, labeling him a radical Christian Nationalist linked to the January 6th insurrection. They expressed concern over his history of controversial remarks towards non-Christians, immigrants, and the LGBTQ community, questioning the appropriateness of his role as Guest Chaplain.
  • The European Court of Human Rights ruled that Belgium’s elimination of exemptions for ritual slaughter without stunning, affecting Halal and Kosher practices, did not violate religious freedom or discrimination protections under the European Convention on Human Rights. The Court recognized animal welfare as a legitimate aim under the concept of public morals, emphasizing the evolving nature of societal values towards the ethical treatment of animals.
  • The British Columbia Supreme Court denied the Matsuri Foundation of Canada, a Shinto organization, a property tax exemption for Knapp Island, sought as a “place of public worship” under the Taxation (Rural Area) Act. The court found that the island’s worship use was private, lacking public access and invitation, and rejected Matsuri’s equity-based exemption argument for Knapp Island compared to other British Columbia properties.
  • The Church of England faces scrutiny over claims that it has unwittingly aided Muslim migrants in seeking asylum by converting to Christianity, motivated by the prospect of persecution claims. Bishop Guli Francis-Dehqani acknowledged the difficulty in discerning genuine conversions, highlighting a small number of abuses. The Church defends its actions, emphasizing its biblical duty to care for strangers, while stating that assessing asylum claims is the government’s responsibility.
  • Greece became the first Christian Orthodox country to legalize same-sex marriage, following a Parliamentary vote of 176-76, led by Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis. The legislation, however, restricts same-sex couples from surrogacy rights, sparking criticism from LGBT groups. The Orthodox Church had opposed the legislation for different reasons and threatened supporters with excommunication.
Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Movsesian at Princeton Tomorrow

I’m looking forward to participating tomorrow in a film screening and panel discussion on the history of religious freedom in America at the James Madison Program at Princeton. Details above. Friends of the Forum, stop by and say hello!

Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

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

  • In Long v. Sugai, the 9th Circuit ruled that a Hawaii prison sergeant potentially violated an inmate’s free exercise rights by delivering Ramadan meals four hours before sundown, leading to inedible and possibly unsafe food. The court emphasized that the timing of meal delivery significantly burdened the inmate’s religious practices and instructed the district court to evaluate whether this burden was justified.
  • In Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections and Public Safety, the 5th Circuit denied an en banc rehearing of a case for damages from prison officials who shaved a Rastafarian prisoner’s head. The court said that even though the prison officials knowingly violated his rights, the question of whether the plaintiff can sue for damages under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act is one for the Supreme Court.
  • In Bridges v. Prince Georges County, Maryland, a federal district court declined summary judgment in a suit brought by a Muslim chaplain alleging First Amendment violations due to a “Statement of Applicant’s Christian Faith” in a prison job application. The court found the statement could be seen as a religious test, but disputes over its optional nature and impact on the plaintiff’s religious expression prevented summary judgment for either side.
  • In The Satanic Temple v. Labrador, a federal district court dismissed a case by The Satanic Temple challenging Idaho’s Defense of Life Act. The Satanic Temple argued it violated their religious right to conduct ritualistic ceremonial abortions and now plans to appeal the decision to the Ninth Circuit.
  • The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Montreal is challenging a Quebec law requiring  all palliative care homes to offer medical assistance in dying, arguing it violates religious freedom. The Archbishop asserts that a palliative care home associated with the Catholic Church should not be obligated to administer euthanasia, emphasizing the importance of respecting freedom of conscience.
  •  In Miller v. University of Bristol, a British Employment Tribunal ruled that a Professor’s anti-Zionist views qualified as a protected philosophical belief under the Equality Act 2010. However, the University issued a press release stating that the professor’s employment was terminated because his comments did not meet their behavioral standards.
Posted on by Mark Movsesian

Film Screening at Princeton Next Month

Next month at Princeton University, I’ll be participating in a film screening and panel discussion on religious liberty in the United States, “Free Exercise: America’s Story of Religious Liberty.” The event is sponsored by Princeton’s James Madison Program, where I spent a wonderful semester a few years ago. Details are available here. Friends of the Forum in the area, stop by and say hello!

Posted on by Mark Movsesian

A New Book on Locke, Religious Freedom, and Christianity

Scholars debate the extent to which Lockean ideas about religious freedom, which were so important to the Framers, are consistent with Christianity. An interesting-looking new book from the University Press of Kansas, Everyone Orthodox to Themselves: John Locke and His American Students on Religion and American Society, argues that Lockean liberalism is consistent only with a specific kind of Christianity, namely, a rationalist, non-dogmatic sort. The author, politics professor John Colman (Ave Maria), apparently maintains that conservative Christians are mistaken when they think their commitments compatible with religious freedom. Readers can decide for themselves. Here is the description from the publisher’s website:

Religious liberty is one of the hallmarks of American democracy, but the principal architects of this liberty believed that it was only compatible with a certain form of Christianity—namely, a liberal, rational, Christianity. Conservative and postliberal champions of the freedom of religion often ignore this point, sometimes even arguing that orthodox Christianity was, or should be, at the root of democratic liberty.

Everyone Orthodox to Themselves, John Colman’s close study of the religious views and political theologies of John Locke, Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, and Thomas Jefferson, shows otherwise. Colman demonstrates that Locke and his three American students specifically took aim at the idea of orthodoxy, which they argued continuously tempted its believers to try to impose an artificial uniformity upon the religious diversity that naturally exists in society and thought it necessary to advance a more rational, nondogmatic Christianity given the threat they saw religious orthodoxy posed to a free, liberal society.

While recent arguments have endorsed the idea that there is a crisis of liberalism that can only be met by the revival of more orthodox forms of religious devotion, Colman argues that, according to some of the most prominent American Founders and their philosophic predecessors, such orthodoxy is incompatible with religious freedom and the right to free inquiry. Everyone Orthodox to Themselves demonstrates that only a nondogmatic, rationalist Christianity could be made a friend rather than an adversary to the inalienable right of religious liberty.

Colman’s work reveals how the reform of Christianity, and with it the inculcation of a particular theological disposition, is necessary to secure religious liberty and the right of free inquiry. The book also establishes the importance of Locke’s Reasonableness of Christianity for his larger argument for toleration.

Posted on by L&R Forum

Legal Spirits 056: Can the NY State Thruway Ban Chick-fil-A?

Chick-fil-A Inc. logo (PRNewsFoto/Chick-fil-A)

In this episode, we discuss a bill pending in New York that would require future fast food restaurants at rest stops on the State Thruway to open seven days a week. The bill expressly targets Chick-fil-A, which closes on Sundays in line with the owners’ religious commitments. Does the bill violate Chick-fil-A’s free exercise rights under the US and NY State Constitutions? And what does this controversy suggest about religious practice in the US? 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 U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to review a decision blocking Idaho’s nearly total abortion ban, specifically examining whether the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act overrides state laws like Idaho’s Defense of Life Act. President Biden criticized the decision for allowing Idaho’s nearly complete abortion ban to be reinstated.
  • In United States v. Gallagher, a Tennessee federal court limited the extent to which defendants, facing charges for blocking the entrance to an abortion clinic, can reference their religious beliefs. The court stated that discussion of religion can be used to establish intent or purpose, but could not be used as a defense.
  • In Church of the Celestial Heart v. Garland, a California federal judge refused to dismiss a RFRA suit challenging the Controlled Substance Act, which restricts the church’s use of Ayahuasca, a plant-based psychedelic drug.
  • The School of the Art Institute of Chicago is being sued by a Jewish Israeli student claiming discrimination and hostility; the complaint alleges biased admissions and increased harassment after the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel.
  • A Yale professor has filed a sex discrimination suit against the Abyssinian Baptist Church in New York for rejecting her application to become Abyssinian’s senior pastor.
  • Pope Francis, in his recent remarks to the Diplomatic Corps at the Holy See, called for a global ban on surrogate motherhood, stating that a child should never be the basis of a commercial contract.
Posted on by Mark Movsesian

A History of Evangelicals and Religious Freedom

Here is an interesting-looking collection of essays from Baylor on the history of Evangelical Christians and politics–especially, the politics of religious freedom: The Gospel and Religious Freedom: Historical Studies in Evangelicalism and Political Engagement. Like most religious communities, Evangelicals have a mixed record in this regard, supporting religious freedom in some contexts and opposing it in others. The book’s chapters cover episodes from Wilberforce to Trump. The editor is David Bebbington (University of Stirling-Scotland). Here’s the publisher’s description:

Religious freedom as enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights remains a perennial concern across the globe. Over the centuries many evangelicals have not enjoyed this right in practice, but they have generally advocated its acceptance, especially to allow the spread of the gospel. Not always, however, have they supported freedom for religious groups besides themselves and sometimes they have endorsed discrimination against other bodies.

The Gospel and Religious Freedom explores the complex relationship in theory and practice between evangelicals and religious freedom, covering periods from the eighteenth century to the present. The volume includes studies of the intellectual lineage of asserting the free exercise of religion, of evangelicals in the United States who endorsed religious liberty in the early twentieth century, and of recent American evangelical political pressure on behalf of freedom of religion at home and abroad. Other contributions address the evangelical defense of the cause in British territories in the age of William Wilberforce, the apparent threat to religious liberty by Roman Catholics throughout the world, an evangelical attempt to restrain Muslim laws in Nigeria, and the persecution of believers by Communists in Eastern Europe and China.

Evangelical Christians emerge as preeminently concerned with evangelism but in other respects diverse in their responses to challenges in various global regions. This volume is designed to demonstrate something of the significance of the evangelical movement in the history of the modern world.

Posted on by L&R Forum

Around the Web

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

  • In Carrero v. City of Chicago, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois allowed a city employee, who was placed on unpaid leave for refusing to comply with the city’s Covid vaccine mandate because of religious objections, to move ahead with claims under the Free Exercise Clause and the Illinois Religious Freedom Restoration Act.  The employee was denied an exemption from the mandate because he did not bring forth a signed affirmation of belief from his pastor, who had a policy of not signing the forms.
  • In Chaudhry v. Community Unit School District 300 Board of Education, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois dismissed Establishment Clause, Due Process and Equal Protection claims by Muslim parents against an Illinois school board where a teacher allegedly convinced their daughter to convert to Christianity. The court found that under Monell, a school board cannot be held liable under the theory of respondeat superior.
  • In Craven v. Shriners Hospital for Children, the United States District Court for the District of Oregon dismissed a Title VII religious discrimination claim brought by a hospital maintenance technician who was fired after he was denied a religious exemption from the employer’s Covid vaccine mandate because the technician had not adequately alleged that his objections to the vaccine were religious in nature.
  • In Markley v. Liberty University, Inc., a Virginia state trial court held that the ministerial exception doctrine does not prevent a former Administrative Dean from suing Liberty University, a Christian institution, where the school terminated his employment because he engaged in whistleblower activities. The court found that the plaintiff was not a “minister” because his responsibilities did not include leading religious organizations or worship services, nor did they include serving as a minister of the faith.
  • The EEOC announced that Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta will pay $45,000 in damages to a former maintenance employee who brought a Title VII suit after the employee was denied a religious exemption from the healthcare system’s flu vaccine requirement. Under the settlement, Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta agreed to modify its religious exemption policy to presume eligibility for employees who work away from patients and other staff.
  • In another Title VII suit, the EEOC announced that Triple Canopy, Inc. will pay $110,759 in damages to an employee who was denied a religious accommodation of his Christian belief that men must have beards after the employee was unable to provide support for the validity of his beliefs. The company also agreed, in the settlement, to institute a new religious accommodation policy.
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.