Around the Web

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

  • In Anchor Stone Christian Church v. City of Santa Ana, a federal district court in California issued an injunction allowing a church to renovate an office building it acquired. The court held that the city’s denial of a conditional use permit to the church violated RLUIPA and the Free Exercise clause. 
  • An international human rights lawyer urged President Trump to fulfill his campaign promise of facilitating an agreement for the release of Christian Armenian POW’s in Azerbaijan.
  • The Georgia legislature passed the Georgia Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which requires that substantial burdens on the exercise of religion be justified by a compelling interest. A clause was added stating that “granting government funding, benefits, or exemptions” would not violate the act.
  • Kansas governor Laura Kelly vetoed a House Bill which, if passed, would ensure religious liberty for prospective foster families. The bill was designed to prohibit the state from requiring families to accept certain ideological policies which may conflict with their religious beliefs.
  • A federal district court held that two Jewish groups can pursue equal protection and free exercise claims against the University of California, Berkeley, regarding antisemitic treatment.
  • India’s parliament passed a new bill that amends the laws governing Muslim land endowments, allowing non-Muslims to manage the properties (known as waqfs).

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!

Around the Web

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

  • In Youth 71Five Ministries v. Williams, the 9th Circuit issued an injunction allowing a Christian organization to participate in Oregon’s Youth Community Investment Grant Program after the state canceled its grants due to religious-based hiring practices. The court found that Oregon selectively enforced its Certification Rule against the organization while continuing to fund secular groups that also violated the rule.
  • In Resurrection House Ministries, Inc. v. City of Brunswick, a Georgia federal court dismissed the ministry’s Religious Land Use And Institutionalized Persons Act claim but allowed its other constitutional claims to proceed. The court found that the ministry sufficiently alleged the city’s nuisance action was retaliatory and aimed at deterring its religious practices.
  • In Knights of Columbus Council 2616 v. Town of Fairfield, a Connecticut federal court allowed the Knights of Columbus to proceed with free speech, free exercise, and equal protection claims after the town denied the group a permit to hold a Christmas Vigil in a public park. The court found that the town’s stated COVID-19 concerns were likely pretextual and that the Special Events Permitting Scheme lacked adequate standards, giving the Commission unbridled discretion.
  • In Desmarais v. Granholm, a D.C. federal court allowed a Title VII claim to proceed in which a Department of Energy employee alleged that his request for a religious exemption from the Covid vaccine mandate was deprioritized compared to medical exemptions. The court found that the employee plausibly alleged a causal connection between his religious beliefs and the decision to delay his accommodation request.
  • In North United Methodist Church v. New York Annual Conference, a Connecticut trial court dismissed the local church’s petition for a declaratory judgment on its disaffiliation from the parent church, citing the need to avoid involvement in church policy matters.

Around the Web

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

  • Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court held in 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis that the First Amendment prohibits Colorado from requiring a wedding website designer to design websites for same-sex weddings in violation of her religious beliefs. On remand, 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, the District of Colorado entered a final order in the case in favor of the designer.
  • The Department of Justice filed suit in federal court seeking to enjoin the California Department of Corrections from requiring Muslim and Sikh officers to be clean shaven so that they can properly wear tight-fitting respirators. The complaint argues that wearing a beard is a sincerely held religious belief and that the Department of Corrections has not made an effort to accommodate the officers by, for example, placing them in positions that do not require use of respirators or offering alternative respirators that fit over beards. 
  • In St. Timothy’s Episcopal Church v. City of Brookings, a federal district court held that a zoning ordinance limiting the number of days a church can serve free meals to needy people violates RLUIPA. The church has been serving meals three to four times per week, but, in 2021, the city amended its zoning code to require a permit to continue serving meals and limited the service to two times per week.
  • In Shlomo Hyman v. Rosenbaum Yeshiva of North Jersey, the New Jersey Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a suit brought by a rabbi who was terminated by an Orthodox Jewish day school for allegedly engaging in inappropriate conduct with elementary school-aged female students. The rabbi alleged the investigation that led to his termination was a “sham” and that he had been defamed, while the day school argued that he could not sue the school because its decision to terminate him is covered under the ministerial exception.
  • In T.I. v. R.I., a New York state trial court held that it would recognize a couple’s religious marriage even though the marriage was later annulled by a religious tribunal. The husband claimed that after the annulment, the marriage no longer existed and sought to have the wife’s civil divorce action dismissed, but the court refused to do so.
  • In S.E. v. Edelstein, an Ohio state appellate court affirmed dismissal of a suit brought by an Orthodox Jewish wife alleging her father-in-law intentionally interfered with a Jewish-law marriage contract she had with her husband. The court found that the suit, although couched as an intentional interference with contract claim, essentially sought damages for alienation of affections and breach of promise to marry, and those claims were barred by Ohio law

Around the Web

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

  •  In Kristofersdottir v. CVS Health Corp., a nurse-practitioner filed a complaint in the Southern District of Florida alleging that CVS revoked all religious accommodations that allowed employees to refuse to prescribe contraceptives, which is the accommodation plaintiff had for over 7 years. 
  • In Dad’s Place of Bryan, Ohio v. City of Bryan, a Christian church filed suit in the Northern District of Ohio, alleging that the city has violated the First Amendment’s Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses, as well as RLUIPA, by charging the church’s pastor with 18 criminal counts for allowing homeless persons to reside on the property for an extended amount of time in violation of city zoning rules.
  • In Uzomechina v. Episcopal Diocese of New Jerseythe District of New Jersey dismissed racial discrimination and wrongful discharge claims brought by a priest who was fired after he was allegedly falsely accused of financial and sexual misconduct. However, the court allowed the priest’s defamation claim, which he alleges that the Diocese passed on false information about him to his subsequent employer, to proceed.
  •  In Carter v. Virginia Real Estate Board a Virginia trial court held unconstitutional a portion of Virginia’s Fair Housing Law that said: “use of words or symbols associated with a particular religion . . . shall be prima facie evidence of an illegal preference under this chapter that shall not be overcome by a general disclaimer.” A realtor included references to Jesus and a Bible verse in her email signature and was investigated, but the court invalidated the statute, saying the presumption of animus was unconstitutional.
  • A Michigan hospital agreed to pay a $50,000 settlement in a Title VII discrimination lawsuit alleging that the hospital had refused to hire an employee who had objected on religious grounds to receiving a flu shot. The settlement prohibits the hospital from refusing to hire applicants because of their sincerely held religious beliefs opposing such a vaccine mandate.
  • In India, Prime Minister Narendra Modi dedicated the Ram Mandir, a Hindu Temple located on a contested holy site once home to a 16th-century mosque. Critics allege that the temple represents an effort by Modi to elevate the Hindu religion in India’s public life.

Around the Web

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

  •  In United States v. Village of Airmont, the Southern District of New York entered a consent decree settling a RLUIPA suit brought by the United States Justice Department alleging that the village engaged in religious discrimination by revising its zoning code to make it harder for Jews to worship in their homes. The consent decree increases the space in private homes for worship and removes restrictions that limited whom residents could invite into their homes to pray.
  • In Littlefield v. Weld County School District RE-5J, the District of Colorado refused to dismiss a retaliation claim in which a former high school principal sued the District’s Superintendent alleging that the Superintendent demoted him and subsequently failed to renew his contract because he was a conservative Christian male. He claimed that the Superintendent took action against him because of a motivational speech he had given to the Fellowship of Christian Athletes before school started, the retaliation for which violated his First Amendment rights. 
  • In Bella Health and Wellness v. Weiser, the District of Colorado issued a preliminary injunction barring the state from taking enforcement action–under a law enacted earlier this year–against an anti-abortion pregnancy center which offers and advertises its medication that reverses the effects of an abortion pill based on their religious beliefs. The court found that the law banning the abortion reversal medication is not neutral or generally applicable, thus violating Bella Health’s Free Exercise rights.
  • In Darren Patterson Christian Academy v. Roy, the District of Colorado issued a preliminary injunction barring Colorado from excluding a private Christian pre-school from its Universal Pre-School Program which requires schools in the program to agree that they will not discriminate on the basis of gender, race, ethnicity, religion, national origin, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, citizenship status, education, disability, socio-economic status, or any other identity when hiring employees. The court found that the rule likely interferes with the “ministerial exception,” which permits the school to hire key employees in accordance with its faith.
  • In Mays v. Cabell County Board of Education, the parties jointly dismissed their case before the Southern District of West Virginia after they settled a dispute surrounding an evangelical Christian revival assembly held by a high school during homeroom, which the plaintiffs alleged violated the Establishment Clause. Under the settlement agreement, the school board agreed to, inter alia, amend its policies on religion in schools and to require annual training for teachers regarding religion in schools.
  • In Drummond v. Oklahoma Statewide Virtual Charter School Board, the Attorney General of Oklahoma filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus and Declaratory Judgment against the Oklahoma Statewide Virtual Charter School Board challenging its approval of the Catholic Archdiocese’s application for a state-funded online religious charter school. The Attorney General’s brief in support alleged that the approval violates the Establishment Clause and would require the state to directly fund other sectarian groups as well.

Around the Web

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

  • In Thai Meditation Association of Alabama, Inc. v. City of Mobile, Alabama, the Eleventh Circuit U.S. partly reversed summary judgments entered in favor of the city of Mobile after Mobile denied zoning approval for a Buddhist organization to use a house in a residential district for religious purposes. The court found that neither party was entitled to summary judgment under RLUIPA; the district court correctly dismissed plaintiff’s Free Exercise claim because the zoning approval process is neutral and generally applicable; and the Buddhist organization was entitled to an injunction under the Alabama Religious Freedom Amendment to the state constitution.
  • A federal district court in South Carolina rejected two Establishment Clause challenges regarding waivers from federal anti-discrimination requirements that were granted to faith-based child placement agencies in Rogers v. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services and Madonna v. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. The plaintiffs in those cases, a same-sex couple and a woman who did not share the foster agency’s evangelical beliefs, applied to be foster parents, but were denied because the child placement agencies worked only with clients who shared their religious beliefs. 
  • in Johnson v. Cody-Kilgore Unified School District, a federal district court in Nebraska entered a consent decree in a case between Native American parents, who practice the Lakota religion, and a school district, after the student’s hair was cut as part of a lice check. The consent decree stated that the school district will not cut any student’s hair for any reason without prior consent from the parent or guardian.
  • In Tosone v. Way, plaintiff, who wishes to run for public office, filed suit in federal district court New Jersey alleging that he is unable as a matter of conscience to sign an oath that all candidates are required to sign. The oath ends with “so help me God,” which plaintiff argues violates the Free Speech, Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses.
  • The Colorado Supreme Court agreed to hear the case of Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Scardina after the Colorado Court of Appeals decided that Jack Phillips, the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, would have to create cakes even though he did not believe with the message portrayed by the cakes. After the United States Supreme Court announced it would hear Phillips’ first case, in 2018, an activist lawyer called Phillips and requested that he make two cakes: one depicting Satan smoking marijuana and another celebrating a gender transition, and after Phillips refused, the lawyer filed the current suit.
  • The EEOC announced that it filed a Title VII suit against the restaurant chain Chipotle, arguing that a manager at a Kansas location harassed a teenage employee for wearing a hijab. The EEOC further alleges that although the teen continuously complained, Chipotle failure to take action, which led to the manager “forcibly removing part of the teen’s hijab.”

Around the Web

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

  • In Fellowship of Christian Athletes v. San Jose Unified School District Board of Education, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, sitting en banc, held that Fellowship of Christian Athletes (FCA) is entitled to a preliminary injunction requiring the school district to restore recognition to FCA chapters as student clubs. The school district revoked FCA’s recognition as a club because FCA requires its officers to affirm a Statement of Faith and abide by a sexual purity policy, which the 9th Circuit said violated the club’s Free Exercise and Free Speech rights.
  • In Catholic Healthcare International, Inc. v. Genoa Charter Township, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ordered a Michigan federal district court to enter a preliminary injunction that will allow a Catholic healthcare organization to restore a Stations of the Cross prayer trail as well as a stone altar and mural after Genoa Township zoning officials insisted that the Prayer Trail should be treated as a church for zoning purposes. Plaintiffs argued that the zoning ordinance as applied to them violates RLUIPA, and the 6th Circuit agreed.
  • In Damiano v. Grants Pass School District, two Oregon educators filed their opening brief in the 9th Circuit after a federal district court ruled against them. The educators were terminated after they voiced their opinions online about gender identity education policy solutions, rooted in their religious beliefs, which they claim violated their Free Exercise and Free Speech rights.
  • In Virden v. Crawford County, Arkansas, the Western District of Arkansas denied plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction after the Crawford County Library System implemented a policy removing books with LGBTQ+ themes from the children’s sections of the libraries. Plaintiffs claim this violates the Establishment Clause because the policy was implemented due to pressure from religious objectors. However, the court left open the possibility of a narrower injunction later on. 
  • In The Catholic Store, Inc. v. City of Jacksonville, the Middle District of Florida entered a consent decree which concluded that The Catholic Store, a privately owned Catholic book store in Jacksonville, is exempt from Jacksonville’s public accommodations law. The order exempts the bookstore from the non-discrimination provisions relating to sexual orientation and gender identity.
  •  France’s Council of State upheld the government’s ban on Muslim girls wearing the abaya at school. The court found that the ban did not constitute a serious interference with private life, freedom of worship, or the right to education.

Around the Web

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.

Around the Web

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

  • In Forter v. Young, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a former prisoner’s complaints about the procedure used to deny his religious meal accommodation request. In seeking access to kosher meals, the former prisoner cited a Bible verse, and a prison official cited an additional verse to express his disagreement. The court found that the official’s response did not constitute an establishment of religion in violation of the establishment clause.
  • In Doe I v. Cisco Systems, Inc.the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals held that Falun Gong members, who were victims of human rights abuses carried out by China, can move ahead with claims against Cisco Systems and its executives for their assistance that enabled China to carry out monitoring of Internet activity by Falun Gong members. Falun Gong is a religion that originated in China in the 1990’s.
  • In Fitzgerald v. Roncalli High School, Inc., the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed a suit based on the ministerial exception doctrine where a Catholic high school guidance counselor’s contract was not renewed because her same-sex marriage was inconsistent with the Catholic school’s religious mission. The court found this to be an easy case because of a recent ministerial exception doctrine decision the court issued last year. 
  • In Must v. County of Fillmore, the Minnesota Court of Appeals found that the County of Fillmore did not meet its burden of showing it had a compelling interest in requiring the appellants to use septic tanks in violation of their religious beliefs. The appellants were three members of the Amish community who brought suit against the county under RLUIPA.
  • In Britain, the House of Commons held a 90-minute debate on a current law which gives 26 bishops of the Church of England the right to automatically have seats in the House of Lords.