We have another conflict that has arisen between non-discrimination laws and religious practices. In Canada, a woman has challenged the decision of a Halifax aikido school to protect a Muslim man from having contact with females and relieving him of the need to bow in adherence with the traditions of the martial art. Just last week, we discussed another story out of Canada where a university ordered such an accommodation for a Muslim man who did not want to have contact with female students despite the requirements of the curriculum. This decision was reportedly supported by Nova Scotia human rights commission officials. [Photo does not show any of those involved in this story]
Category: Constitutional Law
There is an important ruling in England where an Afghan man is believed to have become the first atheist to be granted asylum based on his rejection of religion. The 23-year-old had good reason to fear that if he returned to Afghanistan, he would be persecuted. While the United States has poured hundreds of billions of dollars into the country, the government continues to reject the most basic civil liberties as well as the separation of mosque and state. The punishment is particularly likely for Muslims who reject their faith. They are considered blasphemers and apostates. What is interesting is that we continue to support Afghanistan when the abuses of that government are now viewed as a basis for asylum in England. We now have the ignobility of one ally (England) trying to protect innocent people from another ally (Afghanistan). More importantly, we still have people putting themselves at risk for a government that denies the very rights that define us as Americans in favor of a rigid religious orthodoxy.
Virginia state Sen. Thomas Garrett Jr. has introduced an anti-sodomy law to replace a prior law that was struck down in 2013 that targets sex with individuals below the age of 18. This new and improved morality law could criminalize an array of different forms of consensual relations, including oral sex. I recently wrote a column on the welcomed demise of morality codes in the United States.
Continue reading “Virginia Legislators Introduce New Anti-Sodomy Law”
U.S. District Judge Terence Kern is under fire today from religious conservatives as an “activist judge” after he joined a growing list of federal judges striking down bans on same-sex marriage. Kern found that the state law violated the U.S. Constitution’s equal protection clause. What is most interesting is that, like the earlier Utah ruling, Kern relies heavily on last summers rulings in Windsor and Hollingsworth. While Windsor had positive language for same-sex couples, the Court actually avoided the merits of the constitutional question on equal protection in favor of leaving the matter to the states in striking down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Yet, courts are reading the ruling as a green light for broader constitutional rulings on the federal level.
Continue reading “Federal Judge Strikes Down Oklahoma Ban On Same-Sex Marriage”
The situation is getting worse for homosexuals in Nigeria by the day. The country has been taken over by a violent homophobia that led a few years ago to the enactment of a draconian law criminalizing homosexuality. Police recently have been arresting homosexuals and torturing them to name others for prosecution under the Same Sex Marriage Prohibition Act, which allows for ten years in jail. The law is not just about marriage. Called the “Jail the Gays” bill, it criminalizes homosexuality and threatens AIDS programs in the country. The question is that, as the recipient of a great deal of U.S. aid, why is it appropriate for us to indirectly support a nation that is abusing, and in some cases killing, gays and lesbians?
Woodridge, Illinois, outside of Chicago, has a curious way of meting out justice. You may have a presumption of innocence under the Constitution, but if police arrest you, you still have to pay for the pleasure of the arrest. Starting this year, anyone arrested in a Chicago suburb must pay a $30 booking fee . . . even if they are found innocent.
Recently, I testified on the concentration of authority in the Executive Branch and an array of unconstitutional acts committed by President Barack Obama in the circumvention of Congress. For prior columns, click here and here and here and here. One of the key areas discussed in my testimony was the President’s abuse (in my opinion) of his recess appointments power. I have two law review articles out on the issue. See Jonathan Turley, Recess Appointments in the Age of Regulation, 93 Boston University Law Review ___ (2013) and Jonathan Turley, Constitutional Adverse Possession: Recess Appointments and the Role of Historical Practice in Constitutional Interpretation, 2103 Wisconsin Law Review ___ (2013). Now the issue is to be heard today by the Supreme Court in Noel Canning v. NLRB, No. 12-1115.
Continue reading “Supreme Court Takes Up Challenge To Obama’s Appointment Authority”
The United States Supreme Court on Monday turned aside Arizona’s appeal to reinstate its law banning most abortions after 20-weeks. In Horne v. Isaacson (13-402), the state asked the Court to review the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. It declined to do so.
Continue reading “Supreme Court Rejects Arizona Appeal of Abortion Restrictions”
Respectfully submitted by Lawrence E. Rafferty (rafflaw)-Guest Blogger
In recent weeks and months, we have all heard and read the many articles and stories about the whistleblower Edward Snowden and his disclosure of enormous amounts of NSA “secrets”. His disclosures have exposed what the NSA was really doing, which is spying on practically every American’s metadata online and on the phone. His disclosures have also put on display what happens to a “whistleblower” in this day and age. He has been forced to flee his home country and is currently living in exile in Russia.
Just what were his crimes that made him fear for his safety and raised doubts as to whether he would ever be given a fair trial for his alleged disclosures of secret material and programs? He did what any good American should do and that is expose illegal or immoral governmental activities and allow the American public to decide whether its government is acting legally and fairly. Didn’t he?
You may think his disclosures were an unprecedented example of a citizen uncovering and disclosing government programs designed to, at best, skirt the line of legality by spying on Americans, but you would be wrong. Continue reading “Whistlebowers Past and Present”
By Mark Esposito, Guest Blogger
This is the third of a multi-part article on the Public Interest Defense and its application to the the Edward Snowden situation. The defense is not recognized in America but other nations have considered this legal mechanism to provide an appropriate way to deflect criminal charges from whistleblowers like Snowden. Part 1 can be found here and Part 2 can be found here.
We found in parts 1 & 2 that the absolute right to a public plebiscite on punishment for political crimes goes back centuries to at least the time of Publius Horatius. We also saw that rulers have used this right to manipulate outcomes to further their own interests in deflecting blame or attacking political opponents. In modern times, the jury has replaced the assembled citizenry but the motivation of rulers to limit or channel the ancient right to their own ends remains. Even in America where the defense doesn’t technically exist but where its cousin, whistleblower protections, do, the urge to rein in messengers of truth remains.
The Public Interest Defense Abroad
Imagine the most influential prosecutor in modern America uttering the following words about the public’s right to understand the secret inner workings of its government:
There is an interesting story out of Canada’s York University and raises the question again with the extent to which business and institutions must accommodate religious values or practices. Professor Paul Grayson at York University was shocked when the university ordered him to allow a graduate student to skip a required part of the curriculum because he did not want any contact with women for religious purposes. He disobeyed the orders of his superiors in refusing the accommodation and could be disciplined for his decision (which was made with the support of his faculty).
A man who admitted posting online footage of himself dressed in a Ku Klux Klan costume to stir 
The widening divide between the United States and England over free speech was captured vividly in the case this case of Christopher Philips who was sent to jail for conduct that would have been viewed as hateful but protected in the United States. Philips was charged with appearing in three YouTube videos dressed as a klansman and posing with a life-sized golliwog doll (a type of rag doll depicting a black person). He is the latest person convicted for “giving offense” in England. Indeed, he pleaded guilty because, as Judge John Warner noted, “It does not require advanced education or knowledge of history to know what you were seeking to convey might cause offense.”
Continue reading “English Man Sentenced For Wearing KKK Outfit And Supporting “Notorious Figures””
A couple in North Chicago, Illinois, Brandy Allen and Nicholas Timmons, have filed a lawsuit against the Lake County Metropolitan Enforcement Group, a Lake County MEG officer, “unknown agents” and “unknown police officers” in a disturbing case of alleged robbery and abuse. The couple says that police stopped them without cause and proceeded to arrest them, interrogated them, and ransack their apartment. They also allege that police took an array of valuable items from their apartment and refused to return the property.
There is a free speech controversy swirling around an ethics complaint in Illinois brought by University of Denver law professor Nancy Leong. Leong runs a blog site called Feminist Law Professors and recently discovered the identity of an anonymous commenter who has, according to Leong, left racist and sexist comments. She says that he is a a public defender in his late 40s and she wants him punished for his comments. We have discussed the free speech rights of public employees in an earlier column and blog postings, including the right to speak on blogs and Internet sites. The actions of Leong are troubling for those of us who believe strongly in free speech values, including the right to anonymity.
There is a troubling case out of Boiling Spring Lake, North Carolina, where a family says that police were called to assist them with their son, Keith Vidal, 18, who was having a schizophrenic episode. After tasering and holding down the boy, an officer shot and killed him. The family says that the police pointed out that he had a screwdriver but they say that the screwdriver was tiny and could not have hurt anyone and that Vidal, who was being held down by multiple officers, was only 90 pounds.