Britain's Court of Appeal: Christian Radio Ad Barred By Ban On Political Advertising

 Britain's Communications Act 2003 prohibits the broadcasting of any "advertisement which is directed towards a political end."  In London Christian Radio Ltd. v Radio Advertising Clearance Centre, (Ct. App., Nov. 19, 2013), the England & Wales Court of Appeal in a 2-1 decision held that a proposed ad from a publisher of Christian magazines that was to be run on a Christian radio station violates this ban.  The proposed ad stated:We are CCP. Surveys have shown that over 60% of active Christians consider that Christians are being increasingly marginalised in the work place. We are concerned to get the most accurate data to inform the public debate. We will then use this data to help make a fairer society. Please visit CCPmagazines.co.uk and report your experiences.In upholding the decision of the Radio Advertising Clearance Center to bar the ad, Lord Justice Dyson said in part:What matters is the effect of an advertisement on political debate. The question is whether it will frustrate the statutory aim of ensuring that, so far as practicable, the playing field of political debate is level....Lord Justice Elias dissenting said in part:The only issue is whether, considered objectively and by focusing solely on the advertisement, the listener is being subjected to a partial political message.... The fact that the purpose is to enable the advertiser in future to seek to exert such influence and operate as a more effective pressure group does not in my judgment amount to an infringement of [the statute].Huffington Post UK reports on the decision.

Hotel Settles Religious Discrimination Suit With EEOC

  The EEOC announced today that the MCM Elegante Hotel in Albuquerque, New Mexico has agreed to settle a religious discrimination suit brought by the EEOC charging that the hotel refused to accommodate a Muslim employee, Safia Abdullah, who was hired for a housekeeping position.  The hotel insisted that Abdullah remove her hijab  (religious head scarf), and fired her when she refused.  Under the settlement, the hotel will pay $100,000 in damages and consent to an injunction baring future discriminatory practices. It will also institute new training and notice procedures.

Illinois Governor Signs Marriage Equality Law; Catholic Bishop Responds With Exorcism Prayers

 Chicago Tribune reports that yesterday Illinois Governor Pat Quinn signed into law the Religious Freedom and Marriage Fairness Act, legalizing same-sex marriage in the state. (See prior related posting.) The law takes effect June 1, though some are pressing for additional legislation to speed up the effective date.  Meanwhile, in Springfield, Illinois, Catholic Bishop Thomas Paprocki held a a service, largely in Latin, to offer Prayers of Supplication and Exorcism in Reparation for the Sin of Same-Sex Marriage.  In his homily (full text), he said in part:Our prayers at this time are prompted by the fact that the Governor of Illinois today is signing into Illinois law the redefinition of civil marriage, introducing not only an unprecedented novelty into our state law, but also institutionalizing an objectively sinful reality....Our prayer service today and my words are not meant to demonize anyone, but are intended to call attention to the diabolical influences of the devil that have penetrated our culture, both in the state and in the Church....Since the legal redefinition of marriage is contrary to God's plan, those who contract civil same-sex marriage are culpable of serious sin. Politicians responsible for enacting civil same-sex marriage legislation are morally complicit as co-operators in facilitating this grave sin.....We must also affirm the teaching of the Catholic Church that homosexual persons "must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity....." The Church loves homosexual persons and looks upon them with compassion, offering assistance through support groups such as the Courage Apostolate to live in accord with the virtue of chastity.

Shinto Is Growing Force In Japanese Politics

 The Japan Times yesterday carried an interesting article on the growing influence of Shinto in Japanese politics. Japan’s education minister, Hakubun Shimomura, is concerned about the negative self-image Japanese high schoolers have. His solution is more moral and patriotic education. This is part of a broader political movement:Many of the nation’s top elected officials, including [Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and Education Minister Shimomura] ... are members of ... Shinto Seiji Renmei (officially, the Shinto Association of Spiritual Leadership...). A sister organization, the Shinto Political Alliance Diet Members’ Association boasts 240 lawmakers, including 16 out of the government’s 19-member Cabinet....Seiji Renmei sees its mission as renewing the national emphasis on "Japanese spiritual values." In principle, this means pushing for constitutional revision and patriotic and moral education, and staunchly defending conservative values....The American Occupation of 1945-51 ended Shinto’s status as a state religion and attempted to banish its influence from Japan’s public sphere, notably its emphasis on a pure racial identity linked to the Emperor. The core element of this belief, ruthlessly enforced through the education system, was the emperor’s divine status as a direct descendant of the sun goddess Amaterasu. Though weakened, Shinto conservatives in Japan “were simply biding their time” until they could restore the religion’s rightful place in Japanese society.... 

Court Passes On Discovery Requests In Case Challenging NYPD's Surveillance Of Muslims

  In Raza v. City of New York, (ED NY, Nov. 22, 2013), a New York federal district court ruled on challenged discovery requests in a lawsuit by 3 individuals, 2 mosques and a non-profit who claim that the NYPD engaged in unconstitutional surveillance and investigation of Muslim leaders, organizations, businesses and mosques. (See prior posting.)  The court permitted discovery of documents specifically concerning plaintiffs, and information regarding the structure of the NYPD Intelligence Division. It also permitteddiscovery regarding any NYPD policy or program involving the investigation of Muslims as a group based, in whole or part, on their religion. Without this discovery, Plaintiffs would be preemptively and irreparably prohibited from proving that Defendants’ alleged discriminatory intent was a motivating factor in the investigation and surveillance of Plaintiffs.However the court denied plaintiffs' request for information on all NYPD investigations and surveillance of Muslims (whether or not based on their religion) and all investigations and surveillance of non-Muslims on the basis of their religious beliefs or practices. The court concluded that "these requests are, at best, of limited probative value or relevance and, at the same time, impossibly burdensome." Huffington Post yesterday reported on the decision.

Massachusetts Judge OK's State Funds To Restore Historic Church Windows

 On Martha's Vineyard in Massachusetts yesterday, a state trial court judge denied a preliminary injunction, refusing to block the use of state Community Preservation Act funds to restore the stained glass windows at the historic Trinity Methodist Church.  The Vineyard Gazette reports that the court found the plaintiffs had failed to show a likelihood of success on the merits of their claim that the expenditure would violate the federal Establishment Clause, as well as the provision in the  Massachusetts constitution that bars the use of public money for any private religious or charitable undertaking.

Federal Court Says Contraceptive Coverage Accommodation For Religious Non-Profits Likely Violates RFRA As Non-Profit Suits Keep Being Filed

 Yesterday a Pennsylvania federal district court became the first to weigh in on the merits of the accommodation provided for religious non-profit educational and charitable organizations that object to the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage mandate.  The court, finding a likelihood of success on the merits in plaintiffs' RFRA challenge to the final rules that were adopted in June, issued an expedited preliminary injunction.  In Zubik v. Sebelius, (WD PA, Nov. 21, 2013), the court said in part:[A]lthough the “accommodation” legally enables Plaintiffs to avoid directly paying for the portion of the health plan that provides contraceptive products, services, and counseling, the “accommodation” requires them to shift the responsibility ... onto a secular source. The Court concludes that Plaintiffs have a sincerely-held belief that “shifting responsibility” does not absolve or exonerate them from the moral turpitude created by the “accommodation”; to the contrary, it still substantially burdens their sincerely-held religious beliefs.....The application of these two regulations – one an exemption and one an accommodation – has the effect of dividing the Catholic Church into two separate entities. Now, one regulation (the “exemption”) applies to the worship arm of the Catholic Church and thus applies to all of those employees who work inside a church’s walls. While the other regulation (the “accommodation”) applies to the “good works” arms of the Catholic Church, and thus applies to those who stand on the church steps and pass out food and clothes to the needy.... [B]y dividing the Catholic Church in such a manner ..., the Government has created a substantial burden on Plaintiffs’ right to freely exercise their religious beliefs.The court went on to hold that the exemption for churches themselves "is an acknowledgment of the lack of a compelling governmental interest" at least as to some employers. It then reasoned:If the Court were to conclude that the Government’s stated interests were sufficiently “compelling” to outweigh the legitimate claims raised by the nonprofit, religious affiliated/related Plaintiffs, the net effect ... would be to allow the Government to cleave the Catholic Church into two parts: worship, and service and “good works,” thereby entangling the Government in deciding what comprises “religion.”Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports on the decision. [Thanks to Luke Goodrich for the lead.]Meanwhile, another religious non-profit whose challenge originally posed ripeness problems (see prior posting)  has filed a new lawsuit challenging the contraceptive coverage mandate. The case is Belmont Abbey College v. Sebelius,(D DC, filed 11/20/2013) (full text of complaint; press release from Becket Fund).

Angola Steps Up Ban On Mosques In the Country

 A report today from OnIslam indicates that the largely Christian country of Angola is stepping up its enforcement of the ban on Islam as an unrecognized religious group operating in the country.  The U.S. State Department's 2012 International Religious Freedom Report described Angolan policy:Religious groups must petition for legal status with the justice and culture ministries....  By law, a religious group must have over 100,000 members and be present in 12 of the 18 provinces to gain legal status.... The high membership threshold for religious groups to acquire legal status restricted registration. The government continued to recognize 83 registered religious groups, but did not register any new groups.... More than 900 organizations have applied unsuccessfully for legal recognition since 1991. The government has not granted legal status to any Muslim groups. Over 2,000 organizations reportedly continued to operate without legal status. The government generally permitted these organizations to exist, function, and grow without legal recognition.However, speaking last week to the Commission of the National Assembly, Angolan Minister of Culture Rosa Cruz e Silva said:The process of legalization of Islam has not been approved by the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights, their mosques would be closed until further notice.... All sects on the list published by the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights in the Angolan newspaper Jornal de Angola are prohibited to conduct worship, so they should keep their doors closed.... In addition, we also have a long list of more than a thousand legalization applications.Meanwhile Angolan President José Eduardo dos Santos said: "This is the final end of Islamic influence in our country." The Nigerian newspaper Osun Defender today says that these steps are designed to prevent the rise of Wahhabi ideology.

Recent Articles, Book and Webcast of Interest

a From SSRN:Patrick Parkinson, Child Sexual Abuse and the Churches: A Story of Moral Failure?, (Sydney Law School Research Paper No. 13/78, 2013).Neil Parpworth, The Succession to the Crown Act 2013: Modernising the Monarchy, (The Modern Law Review, Vol. 76, Issue 6, pp. 1070-1093, 2013).Anna Su, Exporting Freedom: Religious Liberty and American Power, (November 2, 2013).John Montague, The Law and Financial Transparency in Churches: Reconsidering the Form 990 Exemption, (35 Cardozo Law Review 203 (2013)).Chibli Mallat & Mara Revkin, Middle Eastern Law, (Annual Review of Law and Social Science, Vol. 9, pp. 405-433, 2013).Daniel L. Chen & Susan Yeh, The Construction of Morals, (Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, Forthcoming).Gregory P. Magarian, The New Religious Institutionalism Meets the Old Establishment Clause, (Washington University in St. Louis Legal Studies Research Paper No. 13-11-04, 2013).Tracy A. Thomas, Gay Divorce, (U of Akron Legal Studies Research Paper, 2013).Sara Rankin, Invidious Deliberation: The Problem of Congressional Bias in Federal Hate Crime Legislation, (Rutgers Law Review, Forthcoming).Grace Soyon Lee, Mitigating the Effects of an Economic Downturn on Charitable Contributions: Facing the Problem and Contemplating Solutions, (Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy, Vol. 22, 2013).Karim Ginena & Jon M. Truby, Deutsche Bank and the Use of Promises in Islamic Finance Contracts, (Virginia Law & Business Review, 7(4), 620-649, 2013).

Panelists Lament Loss of Experience At IRS Exempt Organizations Unit

a Yesterday's BNA Daily Report for Executives [subscription required] reports on a Nov. 15 conference on tax exempt organizations sponsored by the American Law Institute and American Bar Association at which speakers lamented the current situation in the Internal Revenue Service's Exempt Organizations unit. Here are some excerpts from the BNA report:Most of the senior IRS officials who worked in the unit have either retired or been pushed out as a result of the May Tea Party scandal, said Marc Owens, a partner with Caplin & Drysdale.... “Everyone from the commissioner down to the director of rulings and agreements in the exempt organizations function were replaced by people with essentially no tax administration experience,” he said. “No experience interpreting the Internal Revenue Code, no experience dealing with taxpayers that apply the code, no experience in doing what the exempt organizations function has done and is in charge of doing.”... One of the impacts of less-experienced employees in recent years has been a dwindling number of technical advice memorandums, the panelists said. TAMs move audit cases to the IRS's national office.... 

Advocacy Groups Charge Michigan Banks Are Closing Muslim Customers' Bank Accounts

 The Detroit News reported yesterday that CAIR-Michigan has asked the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to look into charges that JPMorgan Chase is closing bank accounts of Muslim customers in the metropolitan Detroit area. In July, the Arab-American Civil Rights League complained to the Justice Department and filed a class-action lawsuit making similar charges against Huntington National Bank.

Consent Decree In EEOC Suit Against Car Dealership That Refused To Hire Sikh

 The EEOC announced yesterday the entry of a consent decree in a suit against a New Jersey car dealership for refusing to hire a Sikh man as a sales associate because his religiously-required beard did not meet the company's dress code. The decree in EEOC v. United Galaxy Inc., d/b/a Tri-County Lexus, (D NJ), orders the dealership to pay $50,000 in damages for failing to reasonably accommodate Gurpreet Kherha's religious exercise. The decree also enjoins future discrimination, requires anti-discrimination training of staff, and posting of related information.

Employer Offered Reasonable Accommodation To Muslim Employee For Noontime Prayer

 In Farah v. A-1 Careers, (D KA, Nov. 20, 2013), a Kansas federal district court dismissed a claim by a Muslim former employee of a temporary staffing agency that the agency unreasonably failed to accommodate his need to pray at noontime. The court held:Defendants reasonably accommodated Plaintiff’s religious beliefs by offering to let him go off-site daily for his noon prayers. Accordingly, Defendants were not required to consider other proposals and need not show that Plaintiff’s alternative proposals would result in undue hardship....  But assuming, arguendo, the need to do so, the Court finds undue hardship is an independent reason to grant Defendants summary judgment.The court also concluded that plaintiff had not been constructively discharged.

Proposed Oregon Initiative Would Exempt Objecting Businesses From Involvement In Same-Sex Unions

  The Oregonian reported that this week that a group known as Friends of Religious Freedom have filed a proposed initiative measure (full text) with the Oregon Secretary of State. It is designed to protect private individuals and businesses that have deeply held religious objections from being required to furnish goods, facilities or services for same-sex weddings or civil unions. Last February, the Oregon Attorney General's office opened an investigation into a baker who refused to furnish a wedding cake for a lesbian couple's marriage. (See prior posting.)  The proposed initiative responds to this and to similar applications of anti-discrimination laws elsewhere.  It provides that no individual or business entity acting in a nongovernmental capacity may be penalized by the state or a political subdivision, or subjected to a civil action:for declining to solemnize, celebrate, participate in, facilitate, or support any same-sex marriage ceremony or its arrangements, same-sex civil union ceremony or its arrangements, or same-sex domestic partnership ceremony or its arrangements.In a related development, last July supporters of same-sex marriage in Oregon filed with the Oregon Secretary of State a proposed Right to Marry and Religious Protection Initiative (full text). Supporters are currently seeking the 116,284 signatures necessary to get the proposed constitutional amendment on the ballot. Their website says they now have over 115,000 signatures. [Thanks to Alliance Alert for the lead.]

Note To Readers On Template Redesign

aI have done a bit of a redesign on the template for Religion Clause blog, hopefully to make it more readable.  I invite comments on whether it has succeeded. a Illustration bt Greg RuthWhen I make my grandmother’s breakfast casserole, I’m instantly transported to her bright, warm kitchen on Christmas morning, where it is her annual custom to make the sausage and egg dish along with cool ambrosia salad for breakfast. But at the same time, I’m also back in my little college kitchenette, mixing up the casserole as a birthday surprise for a boy who, as it would soon become apparent, did not like me as much as I liked him.

5th Circuit Remands Sikh's RFRA Challenge To Ban On Kirpan In Federal Building

aIn Tagore v. United States, (5th Cir., Nov. 13, 2013), the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a Title VII religious discrimination claim by a Sikh employee of the Internal Revenue Service who lost her job after she insisted on wearing her kirpan into her federal office building. Federal law (18 USC Sec. 930) prohibits weapons with blades over 2.5 inches long in federal building. The court said that: "An employer need not accommodate an employee’s religious practice by violating other laws."However the court remanded for reconsideration of plaintiff's RFRA claim in light of a Policy Directive issued by the Federal Protective Service after the case concluded in the district court. (See prior posting.) That Directive permits granting of exemptions in federal buildings for Sikh articles of faith, and thus possibly undercuts the government's argument regarding the need for uniform application of the weapons ban.  The appeals court also held that, contrary to the district court's conclusion, plaintiff had created a genuine issue of material fact as to her sincere religious belief in wearing a 3-inch bladed kirpan.  [Thanks to Blog From the Capital for the lead.]

Developments In Challenges To Contraceptive Coverage Mandate

a On Tuesday, a petition for certiorari (full text) was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in Eden Foods Inc. v. Sebeius, (cert. filed 11/12/2013).  In the case, the 6th Circuit Court denied a preliminary injunction to a for-profit natural foods corporation and its Catholic owners who claim that the contraceptive coverage mandate under the Affordable Care Act violates their free exercise rights as protected by the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. (See prior posting.) Thomas More Law Center announced the filing of the cert. petition.In June (see prior posting), a Pennsylvania federal district court granted Geneva College a preliminary injunction pending a decision on the merits in its challenge to the requirement that it include in its student health plans coverage for contraceptives that it considers abortifacients. As reported by BNA Daily Report for Executives [subscription required], the Christian college has now filed a motion and supporting Memorandum of Law (full text) seeking a similar preliminary injunction for the health plan covering its employees. The case is Geneva College v. Sebelius, (WD PA, motion filed 11/12/2013).

Hawaii Court Upholds State's New Marriage Equality Law

aIn Hawaii, a trial court judge rejected a state constitutional challenge to the Hawaii's marriage equality law that was signed by the governor yesterday. According to the Honolulu Star-Advertiser, Circuit Court Judge Karl Sakamoto held yesterday that the legislature has the inherent authority to define marriage. In 1998, Hawaii voters approved an anti-gay marriage constitutional amendment.  But unlike amendments in a number of other states, Hawaii's Art. I, Sec. 23 merely permits the state legislature to reserve marriage to opposite sex couples. Plaintiffs in the case, including a state representative, a Christian pastor and the head of Hawaii's Christian Coalition argued that in the 1998 amendment, voters intended to ban same-sex marriage. The court rejected this argument.

Suit Settled Allowing Christian Group To Use Building To House Recovering Addicts and Their Children

aAlliance Defending Freedom announced this week that it has reached a settlement with the city of Hattiesburg, Mississippi in a suit challenging the city's refusal to rezone or provide a special use permit for a Christian organization to use a building it purchased for overnight housing of women who are recovering from addiction and their children. The complaint (full text) in Lighthouse Rescue Mission, Inc. v. City of Hattiesburg, Mississippi, (SD MI, filed 5/3/2013) claimed that the zoning denials violated RLUIPA, the federal Fair Housing Act and the speech and religion protections in the federal and state constitutions. The order and settlement agreement (full text, filed 11/7/13) permits Rescue Mission to house allows it to use the building for overnight housing and related ministry operations.

Supreme Court In Unusual Move Gives Interim Relief On Grooming Rules To Muslim Prisoner

aIn an unusual order (full text) yesterday, the United States Supreme Court issued an injunction barring the Arkansas Department of Corrections from enforcing its grooming policy against Muslim inmate Gregory Holt "to the extent that it prohibits applicant from growing a one-half-inch beard in accordance with his religious beliefs."  The order entered in the case of Holt v. Hobbs, (Docket No. 13-6827) will terminate either when the Court denies Holt's petition for certiorari, or, if it grants the petition, when the Court enters its judgment. AP reports that Holt is serving a life sentence for domestic violence and burglary after he cut his girlfriend's throat and stabbed her. Holt, who also goes by his religious name of Abdul Maalik Muhammad, is appearing pro se.  He filed his handwritten application for an injunction while his cert. petition is pending with Justice Samuel Alito (who is assigned to receive such motions in 8th Circuit cases). Alito in turn referred the application to the entire court which issued yesterday's order. Here is the 8th Circuit's opinion upholding the prison system's grooming policy. [Thanks to How Appealing for the lead.]

Court invalidates agreement the couple negotiated before Din bet on lack of formalities

In Katz v. Katz, (S.Ct. Kings Co. NY, 07 November 2013), a New York Court said that a negotiated settlement until a Jewish Rabbinical Court (Beth Din) by a husband and wife is irrelevant because it is not formally recognized in the manner required by NY relations domestic law sec. 236B (3).  As described by the Court, the woman said to him:

was a "victim of extortion" in the sum of $70.000,00 to obtain a get, a Jewish divorce, the husband...  [She] alleges that she only granted joint custody and hours of access to detailed parent in writing on May 17, 2010 because "was bullied to give in to the unreasonable demands of the accused from custody, visitation and holidays" and that she believed her husband would not grant its get [a religious divorce] less than she did... She alleges that it placed $50,000.00 in trust to "ensure" that the husband would give him a get and has "did not receive [stem] money and create which has been given to the accused, and that is using [the trust] money to support this litigation."

The husband denies that the wife was a victim in the process of obtaining the get and claims... that if the wife "is not in accordance with the principles of the Jewish law and Torah or felt that the process was unfair to her, I didn't have to go through the process of getting" and what is "fake it for the benefit of the Gets and then attack the Jewish law and Torah under which it was published". "Categorically" denies receiving it money from the wife gives him a get change. Husband alleges that it is he, not the wife, who is now victim in this litigation: claims that "[i] t is only because [he] did not think [son] should be traveling to Israel, that [the woman] is now taking reprisals against [it] trying to remove value [I] [sic] in most life - custody of [his] son."

Appeals Court rejects failure to oversee the suit against the diocese for abuse victim

In D.T. v.Catholic Diocese of Kansas City - St. Joseph, (CA. MO, November 12, 2013), a Court of appeals of the State of Missouri upheld the dismissal of claims against a Catholic Diocese by the plaintiff who was sexually abused by a priest who serves on one of their parishes. The lawsuit alleges that the diocese knew that the priest had sexually had abused children in the past and who knew that it was substantially certain that it could disturb other children in the future.  Based on the decision of the Supreme Court of Missouri in Gibson 1997 v. Brewer, the Court of Appeal held that claims based on negligence against the diocese are excluded by the first amendment because encourage them leads to excessive entanglement.  Also, reluctantly, he dismissed claims of intentional failure to supervise clergy because in Gibson, a diocese could be responsible in these cases only when the abuse occurred on property belonging to the diocese. The Court of appeal said that it is bound by the precedent of the State Supreme Court, despite the questionable results produced in this case:

Taken to the extreme, then, a religious organization could be fully aware that a member of their clergy, when placed near children, certain or substantially certain that sexually abused children; but while encouraged his clergy to take their personal crime trends local is not owned, possessed or controlled by the Church and not use a piece of furniture of the Church in the Commission of the harmful and often criminal actionsThere could be no civil liability for intentional breach of supervision. 

Result seems to contradict the spirit and intent of the intentional tort recognized and announced by the Court of Gibson... Perhaps this is a case that our Supreme Court may want to accept transfer to clarify the application of the elements of the tort of intentional failure to supervise clergy than previously announced in Gibson, particularly to light the fact that both resets (second) of Agency and grievances have been reviewed since Gibson was decided.

AP reports on the decision.

Endorsing the Agency for two chaplains conservative demand goes on education Pastoral Programme clashes

Fox News and Breibart story on a federal lawsuit filed last week by the Agency's two military chaplains who were expelled from a Clinical Pastoral Education program run by the Department of Veterans Affairs in San Diego. The program is required to work as a chaplain at a veterans hospital. The two chaplains, which were endorsed by the Conservative Baptist Association of America, continually clashed in class with the liberal religious instructor, Nancy Dietsch.  The complaint (full text) Conservative Baptist Association of America, Inc. v. Shenseki, (D DC, presented the 08/11/2013), presents examples of exchanges in the classroom between Dietsch and Steven Firtko and Dan Klender, chaplains, among which are:

... Dietsch said the kind who believes that God could be a man or a woman. Chaplain Firtko recited the Lord's prayer, saying "our father who art in heaven." In response, Ms. Dietsch angrily banged his fist on the table and shouted: "do not quote Scripture in this class!"....

Klender chaplain when he responded to a question during a discussion group on shooting in Newtown CT, claiming that it would have a father whose son was victim stating that "there is evil in the world," the Ms. Dietsch disputed convictions of faith affirming that they do not work in a clinical setting Sandy Hook school. In the presence of the other students said: "do not actually think that truth?"

Dietsch said also that the class that will the and she "do not allow chaplains to pray 'in the name of Jesus' in public ceremonies."The lawsuit alleges that the intolerance of the program of the dominant Judeo-Christian beliefs violates RFRA, free exercise of the first amendment and freedom of speech clauses. He also claims that discrimination against chaplains of the Conservative Baptist Association was arbitrary and capricious.In a statement to the media, the VA says that two chaplains "bullying other classmates and refusing to honor other faith groups." [Corrected to make clear that that applicant is the Agency, not the military chaplains. Thanks to God and the homeland blog.]

The Government of Norway will propose new law on circumcision Ritual

The Minister of health of Norway Brent Hoie says that by this spring, the Government will introduce new laws about circumcision of boys under 18 non-medical. Each year around 2000 babies Jew Muslim and 7 are circumcised in Norway. Yesterday, according to the Jerusalem Post the announcement follows a recommendation by Anne Lindboe Ombudswoman Children Norway to completely prohibit non-medical circumcision of boys younger than 18 without their consent. Lindboe said: "this is not due to lack of understanding of minorities or religious traditions, but because the procedure is irreversible, painful and risky."  It is not clear what will provide the draft law.

Consent order requires priest accused of sexual abuse at the request of the Vatican for the removal of the priesthood

Prosecutor of Bergen County, New Jersey John L. Molinelli issued a press release last week announcing an unusual resolution in a case of sexual abuse of clergy.  As explained yesterday a report RNS, in 2007 Catholic priest Michael Fugee, in order to avoid a retrial on charges of sexual misconduct, signed an agreement, embodied in a court order and the memorandum of understanding, banned you from ministering to children.  It was discovered earlier this year that refugee violated the agreement going to youth retreats and listening to the confessions of teens.  In response, in may he was accused of 5 charges of criminal contempt.  On 1 November, those positions were eliminated through a binding agreement and the court order under which refugee agreed to a request from the Vatican to remove it permanently from the priesthood.  Prosecutor Molinelli said that this result could not have been achieved by the conviction of contempt because:

do not believe that the American justice system has such authority as a condition of parole or by conviction. This is a requirement that eliminates the threat of Michael Fugee, never more, gain the trust of the people through its clerical position or using its position ordained as priest to exercise improper contact with children... The agreement reached forever bars Michael Fugee the same holding as a current or former priest or spiritual counselor. Most importantly, it is prohibited to work with children in any capacity. 

Molinelli also highlighted that this new order will be supervised by the office of the Prosecutor and not by the Archdiocese of Newark, in which Molinelli has lost confidence.

Update: Here is the full text of the order of the Court in the State of New Jersey v. refugee, (N.J. Super. CT., November 01, 2013).

Nevada Supreme Court out of the dispute over the disqualification of the judge for religious links

On 8 November, the Nevada Supreme Court denied a request of Mandamus and/or prohibition of the Health Plan of Nevada v. (Lynam) District Court.  As it was reported by the Las Vegas Review-Journal, in the case of the Health Plan of Nevada was trying to reach the Court court order judge Douglas Smith in a case in which Smith had inhibited himself.  In the case in which the plaintiffs are suing for contracting hepatitis C from a doctor covered by Health Plan HMO, the judge left after the plaintiffs claimed the attorney representing HMO held a position of authority over the judge of the LDS Church.  Lawyer Mark Hutchison (Senator and candidate for Governor) was one of the two directors of the stake President of Red Rock (one of the 38 districts in which divides the Mormon Church in Nevada). The judge served as Adviser to the Bishop of one of the congregations in Red Rock stake. Health plan argued that Hutchison had no direct authority over judge Smith in the Church, and in any case Hutchison has withdrawn now represent Health Plan so that the conflict is eliminated.

Jewish leaders criticize Bush 43's decision to speak at messianic Jewish fundraising

CNN reports that Tevi Troy, former Bush link to the Jewish community is critical of the former President's decision to speak tonight at the dinner of Messianic Jewish Institute fund raising of the Bible, a group whose goal is to convert Jews to Christianity.  CBS reports that other Jewish leaders as director Abe Foxman and Los Angeles Rabbi David Wolpe ADL have also spoken out against the decision by President Bush. The MJBI website says:

The MJBI vision is to bring Jewish people in a personal relationship of faith with Yeshua the Messiah, knowing their acceptance eventually will mean the life from the dead (Romans 11:15).

The Roman Catholic Diocese of Illinois rupture sues the Episcopal Church over property

The Chicago Episcopal Diocese and the Episcopal Church last week filed a lawsuit in State Court alleging that he carried out by or for the parishes and missions of the diocese Anglican rupture of Quincy can only use the property for the benefit of the Episcopal Church. (Press release). The complaint (full text) in the Episcopal Church v. Morales, CT (IL Rd., filed 06/11/2013), seeks a declaratory judgment that the accused individual do not hold any offices of the Quincy Episcopal Diocese and that parishes and missions are controlled by the clergy and the officers appointed or elected by the Episcopal Church.  In a case decided this year, v of the Diocese of Quincy. The Episcopal Church, (IL Cir. CT., 09 September 2013), a different State Court held that the diocese Anglican rupture holds the title of bank account and administrative offices of the diocese. The Court held that the Dennis Canon that the Episcopal Church was based in part is related with properties parish or mission and not property titled in the name of the diocese. Anglican Curmudgeon blog analyzes the background and strongly criticized the Diocese of Chicago by the lawsuit filed last week.

Jury Rejects Religious Harassment Charge By Former School Library Employee

The Roanoke Times reports that a Virginia federal court jury yesterday found for the defendant in Scott v. Montgomery County School Board, a religious discrimination and retaliation suit. (See prior related posting.) In the suit, Judith Scott, a fired school library assistant claimed that her supervisor Nina Donohoe  pressured her for more than a decade to join Christian prayer meetings and Bible study sessions, and that when she refused she was harassed and finally dismissed. Donohoe claimed that her differences with Scott were work-related. After the jurors returned their verdict, Judge James Turk told them: "I think that was the only verdict you could return in this case. It was the principals who recommended [Scott's] contract not be renewed. I think we had two nice ladies in this case who just couldn’t get along. One of them had to go."

7th Circuit In 2-1 Decision Grants Preliminary Injunction To For-Profit Corporations and Their Owners In Contraceptive Mandate Challenge

In Korte v. Sebelius, (7th Cir., Nov. 8, 2013), the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 decision in a consolidated appeal of suits by two unrelated small businesses and their Catholic owners, held that a preliminary injunction should be granted barring enforcement of the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage mandate on religious freedom grounds.  The companies involved are Korte & Luitjohan Contractors, Inc., an Illinois construction company, and Grote Industries, Inc., an Indiana manufacturer of vehicle safety systems.

The majority, in a 64-page opinion, held that for-profit corporations are "persons" whose religious exercise is protected by the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, saying:

It’s common ground that nonprofit religious corporations exercise religion in the sense that their activities are religiously motivated. So unless there is something disabling about mixing profit-seeking and religious practice, it follows that a faith-based, for-profit corporation can claim free-exercise protection to the extent that an aspect of its conduct is religiously motivated.

The majority then concluded that the mandate imposes a substantial burden on the religious exercise of both the corporations and their individual owners and managers that is not justified by a compelling governmental interest and is not achieved by the least restrictive means.

Judge Rovner wrote a very interesting 89-page dissent. Early in her opinion, she sets out several hypotheticals that follow from the majority's decision, involving employers who object on religious grounds to paying for coverage for other kinds of medical treatment for their employees.  Later in her opinion, she discusses at length what she describes as "significant logical difficulties posed by attributing religious rights to secular corporations."  She says in part:

First, to the extent that a corporation’s religious principles and identity derive from its owners, what if the owners have diverse beliefs, diverse degrees of devotion, and diverse notions as to whether and how the corporation ought to reflect their religious beliefs?...

Second, suppose that the company’s ownership changes. What happens then to the beliefs we have attributed to the corporation based on its ownership?....

Third, are the religious beliefs of corporate owners solely determinative of the corporation’s religious principles? Suppose ... that a corporation’s owners have entirely entrusted the management of the corporation to its longtime CEO.... Are her beliefs attributable to the corporation?  Or suppose ... the focus of the corporation is on serving members of a particular religion-- selling kosher or halal food products, for example....  Can the corporation be said to hold the religious beliefs of its target market, even if its owners and managers do not?....

[I]f a corporation has free exercise rights because the Dictionary Act suggests it is among the "persons" to which RFRA grants the right to make such a claim... then why does a corporation of large, diverse, or even public ownership not have free exercise rights also? And how would the beliefs of a public corporation be determined—by a vote at the annual shareholders’ meeting, for example?

The 7th Circuit had previously granted an injunction pending appeal in the case. (See prior posting.)

Letter affirming State secularism presented at the Quebec legislature

As he was reported previously, in August the ruling Government Parti Quebecois in the Canadian province of Quebec announced its intention to present a letter from Quebec secular values in the National Assembly.  Last Thursday he did so by introducing Bill 60, (full text) entitled letter affirming the values of State secularism and religious neutrality and equality between men and women and provide a framework for requests for accommodation.  This is an extract from the explanatory notes, summarizing the most important provisions of the Bill:

Public bodies must, in the pursuit of its mission, remain neutral in religious matters and reflect the secular character of the State. Consequently, obligations are established for the members of staff of public bodies in the exercise of their functions, including the obligation to remain neutral and exercise book in religious matters, among other things, compliance with the restriction of religious objects that openly indicate a religious affiliation. Thus, members of the staff of a public body must exercise its functions with his open face and persons who provide services must also have its open face to receive such services.  The same rules apply to other persons, in particular persons who exercise judicial functions, or judicial function within the administrative branch and members of the staff of the National Assembly.

Canadian Jewish Press reports on concerns that several Jewish organizations on the Bill, including the section 38 would allow the National Assembly to prevent that its members wear religious symbols.

Hawaii legislature passes marriage equality bill

Yesterday the Hawaii legislature gave final approval to SB1, the law of equality of marriage of Hawai'i that legalizing marriages of same-sex unions from December 2. One of the 19 representatives to vote against the Bill in the House was representative Jo Jordan, the first openly gay State legislator to vote against same-sex marriage.  Honolulu magazine said that their objections are based in part on concern that religious exemptions in the Bill are too narrow.  The law protects clergy who refuse to perform civil unions or same-sex marriages and allows that any religious organization or non-profit that is "operated, supervised or controlled by a religious organization" that refuse to provide products, services or facilities for civil unions or marriages that are in violation of the religious beliefs of the organization. According to the Honolulu Star-Advertiser, said Governor Neil Abercrombie will sign the draft law.  It is hoped that it will do so today, surpassing Illinois to become the 15 State to legalize same-sex marriage.  The Illinois legislature passed a marriage equality law last week (see previous publication), but gov. Pat Quinn does not plan to sign until November 20. Shortly after the draft law approved in Hawaii, President Obama issued a statement congratulating the legislature in his action and saying this made it even more proud of being born in Hawaii.

Minnesota High Court Upholds Clergy Sexual Conduct Statute Against Establishment Clause Challenges

In State of Minnesota v. Wenthe, (MN Sup. Ct., Nov. 6, 2013), the Minnesota Supreme Court, in a 4-1 decision, upheld the state's clergy-sexual-conduct statute against both facial and an as-applied Establishment Clause challenges.  The court held that Minn. Stat. § 609.344 which criminalizes sexual penetration by a member of the clergy where the victim is receiving religious or spiritual advice does not violate the Establishment Clause merely because it directly targets clergy or because it requires an inquiry into whether the victim was seeking religious or spiritual advice. The court also concluded that as applied in this case, the evidence presented did not raise an excessive entanglement concern concern. Defendant, a Roman Catholic priest who was charged with having sexual relations with a woman he was counseling, was not likely to be convicted by the jury merely because he violated Church doctrine. AP reports on the decision.

Judge's Religious Comments Lead To Remand For Resentencing

In Tores v. State of Florida, (FL App., Nov.6, 2013), a Florida state appellate court reversed a 30-year sentence imposed on defendant for sexual battery and remanded for sentencing by a different judge because of religious comments made in imposing the original sentence.  In imposing the maximum sentence (when the minimum Guidelines sentence was 9 years, 4 months), the sentencing judge condemned defendant for his consensual dating relationship with the victim while defendant was married to someone else, and then said:

Just because your wife is in another country doesn’t mean you ought to be going out with other women. You’re a good Catholic fellow as I am. That’s not the way Catholic people - - that’s not the way anybody with morals should do anything.

The Florida Times-Union reports on the decision.

Federal Lawsuit Challenges Idaho's Refusal To Permit or Recognize Same-Sex Marriage

A suit was filed Friday in an Idaho federal district court challenging the constitutionality of Idaho's laws that exclude same-sex couples from marrying in the state, and refuse to recognize marriages of same-sex couples entered into lawfully elsewhere.  The complaint (full text) in Latta v. Otter, (D ID, filed 11/8/2013), claims that Idaho Const. art. III, § 28 and Idaho Code §§ 32-201 and 32-209 violate the due process and equal protection clauses of the 14th Amendment. The National Center for Lesbian Rights issued a press release on the case. [Thanks to Alliance Alert for the lead.]

International Court of Justice rules in Thailand and Cambodia dispute the hindu temple site

Yesterday the International Court of Justice of beech issued a decision on the request for interpretation of the judgment of 15 June 1962 in the case concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear (Cambodia v. Thailand). (Full text of the decision; Summary of the judgment; Press release).  In 1962, the ICJ ruled in a border dispute that is the Temple of Preah Vihear (now the UNESCO World Heritage site) into Cambodian territory and ordered that "Thailand is under the obligation to remove any army or police forces, or other guards or caretakers, stationed by it in the temple, or in its vicinity".  Yesterday's decision clarifies what is meant by the area in the "vicinity" of the temple. As described in a report by the voice of America:

The 17 judges of the World Court's unanimous ruling says that all the raised land where ancient Khmer hindu Temple is belongs to Cambodia. While adjusting some of the disputed border, the decision leaves unresolved the sovereignty of much of the 4.6 square kilometer area in the vicinity of the religious compound...

The ICJ decision rejects some territorial claims in the area made by each country so it is not a complete victory for either side...

Within hours of the ruling, Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra of Thailand appeared in a speech televised nationwide, saying that the Court had taken the position of his country into consideration and that Bangkok should work with Phnom Penh to resolve outstanding issues.

The territorial dispute led to an exchange of gunfire and dozens of deaths in 2011.

Court rejects challenges to the ban on New Jersey's conversion therapy for children

In King v. Christie, (D NJ, November 08, 2013), a federal district court in New Jersey dismissed a challenge to the prohibition of the State in therapy to change sexual orientation for minors.  He said that through psychotherapy psychotherapy is not speech under the first amendment.  On the other hand it is behavior.  In so holding, the Court noted in part to the recent decision by the 9th Circuit defending a similar statute in California. The Court was to reject claims that the New Jersey statute is overly broad and vague.  Finally, the Court rejected the claim that the New Jersey statute violates the free exercise clause to prevent the mental health providers to exercise their religious beliefs sincerely that it is possible to change the attraction to the same sex or the behavior. The Court concluded that the Statute is a neutral law of general applicability. The Newark Star Ledger, reports on the decision.

Casos recientes de libre ejercicio prisionero

In Whitaker v. Whitener, 2013 US Dist. LEXIS 157692 (WD NC, November 01, 2013), a North Carolina federal district court dismissed without prejudice to the denunciation of a Jewish prisoner who serves their cold kosher, or evening meals or providing them with meals not kosher violates their rights to free exercise.

Barton v. Snaza, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157934 (WD WA, November 4,2013), a Washington federal district court approved the recommendations of a magistrate (2013 US Dist.) LEXIS 157937, 04 October 2013) and dismissed without prejudice prior service due to lack of a claim of the State complaint of an inmate two of his Asatru/Odinism personal books were confiscated by a person not identified, preventing him from making a ceremonial rite in his cell for three different days holiday.

In v. Brooks, United States 2013 Arrendondo Dist. LEXIS 158406 (D NV, 05 November 2013), a federal court in Nevada district approved the recommendations of a magistrate (2013 US Dist.) LEXIS 158403, 23 September 2013) and dismissed the complaint of a prisoner that several of their religious books were confiscated as contraband because he had his name written on them.

In white v. Van Leer, 2013 US Dist. LEXIS 159186 (ED CA, 05 November 2013), a federal magistrate recommended dismissing the complaint of a Muslim inmate who was denied the kosher food instead of the vegetarian of California replace the meals served at breakfast and lunch to those who received the Halal diets.

Medina v. Snyder, 2013 US Dist. LEXIS 159225 (ED CA, 05 November 2013), a federal magistrate judge in California dismissed, with permission to modify, denunciation of an inmate who was denied a kosher food on three occasions.

In George v. City of New York, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159434 (SD NY, 06 November 2013), a federal court district of New York dismissed the claim of a Muslim prisoner that a strip search violated their rights to free exercise. His application to be searched in private was rejected.

West v. grams, 2013 US Dist. LEXIS 160003 (WD WI, 08 November 2013), a complaint deposed judge Wisconsin federal magistrate by a Muslim prisoner to Muslim prayer services were not allowed to perform when a volunteer leader from outside the prison was not available. The Court also rejected his claim that meals are served Ramadan later possible reprisal by their arguing about the right time to serve these meals.

In McKenzie v. Michigan Department of Corrections, 2013 US Dist. LEXIS 159981 (my WD, 08 November 2013), a federal district court dismissed a lawsuit filed by several Jewish prisoners complaining about a change in policy of the Department of corrections that eliminated separate meals Michigan kosher and vegan place meals that comply with kosher and halal available for religious diets.

In Arafat v. Department of Justice of United States, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160075 (D MN, November 08, 2013), a Muslim prisoner complained of the lack of a diet of halal certification in the county jail where he had while his federal criminal trial was underway.  A federal district court in Minnesota dismissed most of their claims but allow you to continue with your application for measures precautionary, as to his being fired as contentious as he concluded his sentencing hearing and he was transferred to federal prison where it was available a diet halal.

EU Court of Justice Rules On When Homosexuals Qualify For Refugee Status

On Thursday, the Court of Justice of the European Union issued a preliminary ruling interpreting Council Directive 2004/83/EC on minimum standards for third-country nationals to qualify as refugees. The Directive defines a refugee, in part as a person who has a "well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of ... membership of a particular social group...." In X, Y, Z v. Minister voor Immigratie en Asiel, (EU Ct. Justice, Nov. 7, 2013), the court held that:

the existence of criminal laws ... which specifically target homosexuals, supports the finding that those persons must be regarded as forming a particular social group.

... the criminalisation of homosexual acts per se does not constitute an act of persecution. However, a term of imprisonment ... which is actually applied ... must be regarded as being a punishment which is disproportionate or discriminatory and thus constitutes an act of persecution.

.... When assessing an application for refugee status, the competent authorities cannot reasonably expect, in order to avoid the risk of persecution, the applicant for asylum to conceal his homosexuality in his country of origin or to exercise reserve in the expression of his sexual orientation.

The Court also issued a press release on the decision. So did ORAM (the advocacy group for LGBTI refugees). It discusses at length the problems that European officials will face in accurately assessing the credibility of asylum claims based on sexual orientation. The Los Angeles Times reports on the decision, focusing on the persecution of gays and lesbians in Africa-- the home continent of the 3 refugees who were parties to the case decided by the court.

U.S. Bishops elect new leaders; Focus on the persecution of Christians overseas

The United States Catholic Bishops Conference began its meeting in autumn in Baltimore yesterday.  As reported by CNS and the New York Times, outgoing President of the Episcopal Conference, Cardinal Timothy Dolan in his speech to fellow - bishops called for a new emphasis in the fight against the persecution of Christians in countries such as Syria, Egypt, India and Nigeria. He said that we are living in what must be recognized as a new era of the martyrs.  He claimed that up to 1 million Christians have been killed for their faith so far in the 21st century, and said that it is a priority to urge political leaders to make protection of "Christians at risk a priority of foreign policy."

The bishops had chosen his current Vice President, Archbishop Joseph Kurtz of Louisville, Kentucky, as the new President of the Conference, and Cardinal Daniel N. DiNardo of Galveston-Houston as Vice President. (Press release). (Associated Press).  They also approved the drafting of a formal statement about pornography.

Supreme Court review sought by the photographer refused employment to homosexual weddings

A petition for certiorari (full text) was presented Friday with the Supreme Court at Elane Photography, LLC v. Willock. In the case, the New Mexico Supreme Court held that the law of human rights of the State requires a commercial photography business to serve same-sex couples on the same basis as opposite-sex couples, and that the first amendment does not require an exception for expressive or creative professions. (See prior publication). Marcos CERT request the question presented as:

If using a State law of publico-alojamiento to require a photographer to create expressive images and illustrated books convey messages that conflict with his religious beliefs violates the prohibition forced the first amendment speech.

ADF issued a press release announcing the filing of the petition.

European Court Says Greek Law Limiting Civil Unions To Heterosexual Couples Violates ECHR

In Vallianatos and Others v. Greece, (ECHR, Nov. 7, 2013), the European Court of Human Rights (Grand Chamber) held, by a vote of 16-1, that a Greek civil union law which is limited to heterosexual couples violates The European Convention on Human Rights. The court concluded that the law is inconsistent with Article 8, violating the right to respect for private and family life of same-sex couples, and amounts to unjustified discrimination between different-sex and same-sex couples in violation of Article 14. The Court issued a press release summarizing the decision.  [Thanks to Paul de Mello, Jr. for the lead.]

Snake handling Pastor accused criminally; Authorities advised by Reality TV Show

RNS reported yesterday that the Tennessee wildlife resources Agency last week raided the Church Tabernacle of Dios LaFollete, Tennessee and seized 53 poisonous snakes, managed by the congregation during worship service. Authorities arrested pastor of the Church, the Reverend Andrew Hamblin, who is the co-star of the series of the reality of the National Geographic Chanel snake salvation.  Wildlife authorities warned is the fact that in the church there were snakes due to the television program. Hamblin was charged with violations of the Tennessee code § 39-17-101 which prohibits the use of a poisonous snake in a manner that endangers others. Hamblin, says that the ban violates the religious freedom of the Congregation and its. They point to language in Mark 16:18 to explain his snake handling rituals.

Tonight Is 75th Kristallnacht Anniversary; New Data On Antisemitism In Europe and U.S. Released

A statement (full text) issued yesterday by President Obama points out that tonight marks the 75th anniversary of Kristallnacht-- the violent Nazi-party inspired anti-Jewish pogroms carried out in 1938 in Germany and German -annexed territory in Austria and Czechoslovakia. Kristallnacht marked a turning point that led to ever-increasing anti-Jewish actions by the Nazi regime. Yesterday, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights released a new report titled Discrimination and Hate Crime Against Jews in EU Member States: Experiences and Perceptions of Antisemitism. Several related publications were also released.This is the first report to collect comparable current data across 8 EU countries-- Belgium, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Sweden and the United Kingdom.  These countries are home to 90% of EU's Jewish population. Among the key findings were:

66% of respondents consider antisemitism to be a major problem in their countries, while 76% said the situation had become more acute over the last five years.

21% of all respondents have experienced an antisemitic incident or incidents involving verbal insult, harassment or a physical attack in the 12 months preceding the survey. 2% of respondents had been victims of an antisemitic physical attack over the previous year.

In related developments, the Jewish Museum Berlin hosted a conference last night and today titled Antisemitism in Europe Today: the Phenomena, the Conflicts. A Haaretz op-ed criticized organizers for scheduling the conference on the Jewish Sabbath, thereby effectively precluding participation by observant Jews.  And, according to JTA, earlier this week a German hotel, the Kristall Sauna Wellnesspark in Bad Klosterlausnitz, in the former eastern German state of Thuringen, apologized for the ad it had run promoting a "long, romantic Kristall-Nacht" on November 9.

In the United States, the ADL on Oct. 28 released its 2013 Survey About Attitudes Toward Jews In America. It concluded that 12% of Americans have deeply entrenched anti-Semitic attitudes, a 3% decline from the last poll in 2011.  Meanwhile, the New York Times reported earlier this week on the extensive anti-Semitic harassment of students in the New York State Pine Bush Central School District.

Recent articles of interest

From SSRN:
Arshad Zaman, Maulana Sayyid Sulaiman Nadvi on law, policy and Government, in Islam, (November 01, 2013).Scott D. Gerber, the right and the lively experiment in Rhode Island Colonial (2 legal British American magazine studies 453 (2013)).Zachary R. Calo, review of ' the tragedy of religious freedom "by Marc O. Degirolami, (religion and rights human 8 (2013)).Nora Abdul Hak & Hanna Ambaras Khan, the application of Sulh in resolving conflicts of community, (submission on paper at the first World Congress on integration and the Islamization of the acquired human knowledge (FWCII-2013)).Susannah William Pollvogt, United States v. Windsor and the Crisis in the jurisprudence of equal protection, (November 06, 2013).David B. Cruz 'Amorphous federalism' and marriage of Supreme Court cases (Loyola Law Review, theme of the Supreme Court, coming soon).