Latest news with #FirstLibertyInstitute
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
EXCLUSIVE: Legal institute celebrates SCOTUS decision, declares 'religious liberty is alive and well'
EXCLUSIVE: A legal organization whose mission it is to defend the religious liberty of Americans has called the Supreme Court's 9-0 ruling in favor of the Catholic Charities Bureau (CCB) "a huge moment for religious liberty in America," and a clear rejection of government overreach into religious life. "This was not a hard call," Tiffany Dunkin, a legal fellow and attorney with the First Liberty Institute, emphasized in an interview with Fox News Digital, citing Thursday's unanimous SCOTUS decision to strike down Wisconsin's attempt to withhold a religious tax exemption because the CCB does not proselytize or serve only Catholics. "What Wisconsin was doing… they were saying that the Catholic Charities was not a religious institution because they did not proselytize or serve people of their own faith," Dunkin explained. Supreme Court Rules Wisconsin Unconstitutionally Discriminated Against Christian Charity "What they were doing was deciding what it means to be religious," she added. "And the First Amendment prohibits the government from doing that." The case, Catholic Charities Bureau Inc. v. Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission, questioned whether faith-based nonprofits that provide public services are "religious enough" to receive the same benefits as churches or houses of worship. Read On The Fox News App Catholic Charities, affiliated with the Diocese of Superior, Wisconsin, provides critical care services for people with disabilities and mental health needs. Wisconsin argued those acts were not "primarily religious." The Supreme Court disagreed. Scotus Rulings This Term Could Strengthen Religious Rights Protections, Expert Says Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing the opinion for the court, stated clearly that the government has no authority to assess or rank the religious nature of charitable work. Dunkin said the consequences of the ruling go far beyond Wisconsin. "This is actually a pretty ongoing problem across the country," she noted. "It's not just Wisconsin. First Liberty Institute represents Dad's Place in Bryan, Ohio… they're saying that because you're running a 24-7 homeless shelter, you're not [religious]." Other clients of Plano, Texas-based First Liberty in Colorado and Arizona have faced similar arguments from local governments, which question whether providing food, clothing or shelter to those in need is inherently religious. "Even though there are churches doing this kind of work, the governments are saying, 'Well, you're not religious enough,'" Dunkin said. The court's language in the ruling, Dunkin pointed out, "affirms what the Supreme Court has said for nearly a century," that the government cannot choose which expressions of faith are valid. "This sends a great message to people of all religions and all charitable organizations," she said. "The government… cannot intrude into telling you exactly what you can and can't do, whether you're religious or not religious, in order to receive a government benefit or participate in society." Had SCOTUS ruled the other way, Dunkin warned, it would have "grave implications" for religious charities and ministries nationwide. "It would allow the government to step into the religious doctrine of all faiths more than our Founding Fathers ever intended," she said. "The government cannot step in and get involved in deciding and picking and choosing between one type of religious activity and another." When asked what this means for churches and ministries on the ground, Dunkin's answer was clear: "They should feel emboldened to continue to do what they feel called to do by their religious faith… especially in a charitable sense." And for those who may see this as a one-off legal win? Not so fast. "I see this really as two different things," she said. "One, an affirmance of what the First Amendment has always stood for… but of course, going forward, we do hope and we're encouraged that religious liberty in America is alive and well. And of course, First Liberty Institute is here to continue to fight for that."Original article source: EXCLUSIVE: Legal institute celebrates SCOTUS decision, declares 'religious liberty is alive and well'
Yahoo
29-05-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Bishops sue to overturn new WA law requiring clergy to report child abuse
Gov. Bob Ferguson, at podium, goes to shake hands with state Sen. Noel Frame, D-Seattle, at the signing of a bill to make clergy mandatory reporters of child abuse and neglect, on May 2, 2025 in Olympia. At center is Mary Dispenza, a founding member of the Catholic Accountability Project. (Photo by Jerry Cornfield/Washington State Standard) Washington's leading Catholic bishops filed a lawsuit Thursday contending the new state law requiring religious leaders to report child abuse or neglect, even when it is disclosed in confession, is unconstitutional and should be invalidated. They argue the law violates their First Amendment right to practice religion free of government interference, and is religious discrimination because it will force priests to violate their sacred vows or face punishment by the state. It also violates a provision of the state constitution guaranteeing 'freedom of conscience in all matters of religious sentiment, belief and worship,' they assert. They want the law set aside and an injunction barring criminal investigations or prosecution of Roman Catholic clergy for not divulging information learned in confession. The new law 'puts Roman Catholic priests to an impossible choice: violate 2,000 years of Church teaching and incur automatic excommunication or refuse to comply with Washington law and be subject to imprisonment, fine, and civil liability,' the suit reads. Archbishop Paul Etienne of Seattle, along with Bishop Joseph Tyson of Yakima and Bishop Thomas Daly of Spokane, are the lead plaintiffs in the suit filed in the U.S. District Court in Tacoma. Gov. Bob Ferguson, Attorney General Nick Brown and the prosecuting attorney in each of Washington's 39 counties are named as defendants. Hiram Sasser, executive general counsel for First Liberty Institute, one of the groups representing the bishops, called the law 'a brazen act of religious discrimination.' 'For centuries, Catholic priests have been willing to die as martyrs rather than violate this sacred duty. A few politicians in Washington state won't break them. And the Constitution protects them,' he said in a statement. First Liberty Institute represented the Bremerton High School football coach who successfully challenged his firing for gathering with players to pray on the field following games. That case went to the U.S. Supreme Court. Mike Faulk, a spokesman for the Washington attorney general, said in an email that they are reviewing the suit. A Ferguson spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment from the governor. This legal fight centers on Senate Bill 5375, which Ferguson signed into law on May 2 and will take effect July 27. It adds clergy members to the state's list of individuals legally required to report suspected child abuse to law enforcement or the Department of Children, Youth and Families. Disclosures in confession or other rites where the religious leader is bound to confidentiality are not exempt. But under the law, they will retain their privilege to not be compelled to testify in related court cases or criminal proceedings. Catholic leaders assert in the suit that existing policies adopted by the dioceses in Seattle, Yakima and Spokane 'go further in the protection of children than the current requirements of Washington law.' They also iterate that confession of sins is one of the seven sacraments of the Roman Catholic Church and is protected by the sacramental seal, which forbids sharing anything disclosed by a penitent. 'The use of a religious practice to further the State's policy goals violates basic constitutional principles prohibiting the excessive entanglement of church and state,' the suit reads. With the law in place, priests would be forced to choose between 'temporal criminal punishment and eternal damnation,' it adds. The Washington State Catholic Conference opposed the bill largely because it did not exempt disclosures heard in the confessional. 'This trust is sacred, and any law that jeopardizes it risks discouraging those who recognize the harm they have caused from seeking moral guidance,' said Jean Hill, the organization's executive director, in a statement. On May 5, the U.S. Department of Justice announced it had opened a civil rights investigation into the 'apparent conflict' of the new law with 'the free exercise of religion under the First Amendment.' Federal officials have provided no updates since the announcement. When he signed the bill, Ferguson said keeping the confessional in the bill did not give him pause. As a Catholic, he said, 'I'm very familiar with it. Been to confession, myself. I felt this was important legislation for protecting kids.'
Yahoo
22-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Prayer service at Pentagon sparks religious freedom debate
For about 30 minutes on Wednesday morning, the U.S. secretary of Defense was focused on the power of prayer, not military power. Pete Hegseth led a prayer service in the Pentagon's auditorium, asking God for wisdom and protection. 'This is precisely where I need to be, exactly where we need to be as a nation at this moment, in prayer, on bended knee, recognizing the providence of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ,' Hegseth said in his opening remarks at the service, per CNN. Wednesday's prayer service took place over the objections of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, which raised concerns about the event when Hegseth discussed his plans to host it earlier this month. 'This is a blatant violation of the First Amendment and its proscription of religion in government,' the foundation's co-president, Annie Laurie Gaylor, said in a May 15 statement. 'These prayer meetings would not only exclude and marginalize the significant number of nonreligious and non-Christian service members, they will send the impermissible message that Christianity is the Pentagon's preferred faith.' In a letter to Hegseth, the foundation spelled out these concerns in more detail, highlighting past Supreme Court rulings barring public officials from promoting their faith. But other organizations came to Hegseth's defense, including First Liberty Institute, a faith-focused law firm. 'Secretary Hegseth's exercise of his religious faith is protected just like it was for the Navy SEALs we represented against the prior administration when it tried to kick them out for their faith objection to Covid requirements. We commend Secretary Hegseth for standing up for the Constitution and against censorship,' said Erin Smith, associate counsel at First Liberty Institute, in a statement. The warring statements shouldn't be surprising if you follow religious freedom law. For decades, legal experts have debated when and how government officials can engage in religious expression — and failed to come to a consensus. The Supreme Court has not done much to resolve the confusion, since its approach to public prayer has shifted over time. It has said that government officials should not privilege one faith over others by, for example, inviting only Christians to lead opening prayers at council meetings. It has also said that public school students shouldn't be forced to participate in prayers, but that more private prayers by teachers or coaches are OK. Hegseth reportedly intends to make prayer services a monthly event. In a statement to CNN, acting Pentagon press secretary Kingsley Wilson tried to address religious freedom concerns. 'The Office of the Secretary of Defense invited DoD personnel to attend a voluntary Christian prayer and worship service this morning. Many different faiths have regular services in the Pentagon Chapel or elsewhere in the Pentagon. This service was an opportunity for Believers to appeal to Heaven on behalf of our great nation and its warfighters. Beseeching the Almighty has been an American tradition since George Washington prayed for our cause at Valley Forge. The United States was then, and remains now, One Nation under God. At this time, OSD envisions that these prayer and worship services will be a monthly occurrence. Any participating civilian clergy are responsible for their own travel and accommodations expenditures,' the statement said. Before he joined the Trump administration, Hegseth was a Fox News contributor. At that job, as at the Pentagon, Hegseth shared his Christian faith with others, as the Deseret News previously reported. For example, in March 2024, he led a prayer on air while promoting a religious app for smartphones. 'Jesus, today we begin the holy period of passion tide,' Hegseth said, according to The Christian Broadcasting Network. 'In these last 2 weeks of Lent, help us understand the mystery of Your sacrifice and surrender, make us keenly aware of Your love for us. We ask that You make Yourself known to us, help us to feel the grace of Your presence.' While living in Tennessee before he moved to Washington, Hegseth attended Pilgrim Hill Reformed Fellowship, which is led by the Rev. Brooks Potteiger. The church is part of the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches. The Rev. Potteiger was the main speaker at Wednesday's event at the Pentagon, per The New York Times.
Yahoo
07-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Utah teacher now allowed to post ‘prayer chain' in faculty lounge after threat of lawsuit
HEBER, Utah (ABC4) — A dispute over whether a Utah teacher can post a prayer chain in the faculty lounge was resolved collaboratively after the district agreed to demands before the case went to court. About two years ago, Taryn Israelson — a teacher at J.R. Smith Elementary in Heber — placed a paper in her faculty lounge reading: 'Need prayer? Want to help pray for others? Text Taryn to be added to the prayer chain.' Prayer chain sign placed in the faculty lounge at J.R. Smith Elementary. (Credit: First Liberty Institute) The prayer chain was allegedly approved by the human resources manager, but attorneys say once 'the principal got wind of it' he told her to take it down. Attorneys said the principal was concerned that it would appear the district endorsed the prayer chain and violated the First Amendment Establishment Clause. Israelson reached out to First Liberty Institute, a legal organization focused on religious freedom, to see if the prayer chain truly was a violation of the law. Utah GOP delegates to vote on stripping party membership for candidates who gather signatures In April, attorneys representing Israelson sent a demand letter threatening a lawsuit if the Wasatch County School District didn't reverse the principal's decision. The lawyers said the prayer chain represents her 'personal religious speech.' 'If the school remains concerned that Ms. Israelson's sign—posted alongside other secular personal messages—may be construed as government speech, the school can provide a simple disclaimer stating that all posted messages are private speech,' the letter reads. Keisha Russel, senior counsel at the institute, told ABC4 that the district 'took some time to review it' and ultimately allowed the prayer chain to remain. School officials decided to create a bulletin board in the break room specifically for employees to post personal notices to mitigate any risk of the prayer chain appearing to be school-led. 'We were really excited about that and grateful that the district did what we asked,' Russell said. Russell said this incident is an example of how schools can be 'stuck in this old way of thinking that the separation of church and state means religion can be banned from the public square.' 'I think a case like this can show a school district [that] the establishment clause doesn't allow you to just completely ban religion, you're supposed to treat religion neutrally so just like you would allow the secular speech from employees you have to allow this religious speech as well,' she said. The district sent a statement to ABC4 saying the situation was resolved with a 'collaborative spirit.' 'Both parties have agreed on a resolution that supports respectful expression and maintains the integrity of the learning environment,' the district said. Read the district's full statement below: Wasatch County School District and the teacher involved in the recent situation at J.R. Smith Elementary have reached a mutual agreement following further review. Both parties have agreed on a resolution that supports respectful expression and maintains the integrity of the learning environment. In accordance with our commitment to fostering a welcoming and inclusive workplace for all employees, space will continue to be made available in staff areas for faculty announcements and personal notices. Any content shared in that space reflects individual expression and not the official views of the District. Out of respect for the privacy of those involved, and to preserve the collaborative spirit in which this resolution was reached, the District will not be providing further comment. —Wasatch County School District Latest headlines: Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to ABC4 Utah.
CNN
10-03-2025
- Politics
- CNN
Supreme Court declines to hear appeal from Christian fire chief who wanted to make it easier to sue for discrimination
The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear the appeal of a California fire chief who claimed he lost his job because of his Christian faith, a case that could have made it easier for Americans to win discrimination lawsuits against employers. Ronald Hittle, a 24-year veteran of the fire department in Stockton, California, said he was fired after attending a two-day Christian conference on city time. The city countered that Hittle had been instructed to attend a 'leadership' conference and told the high court in a brief that the chief had a long history of disobeying direction from superiors. Two conservative justices – Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch – dissented from the decision to deny the case. Represented in part by the First Liberty Institute, which has filed several successful religious claims at the Supreme Court in recent years, Hittle asked the Supreme Court to toss out a 1973 precedent, McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, that has for decades dictated how discrimination claims are reviewed in federal courts. Thomas wrote the precedent targeted by the case was 'producing troubling outcomes on the ground.' 'I am not aware of many precedents that have caused more confusion than this one,' he added. Discrimination claims are reviewed under a three-step process under the precedent. First, an employee alleging discrimination must show they belong to a class of people protected under the law — based on race or sex, for instance — and that the company appeared, at first impression, to have engaged in discrimination. In step two, the employer must then show that it had legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for the actions it took against the plaintiff. In the third step, the burden shifts back to the employee to show that the company's stated reasons aren't simply a pretext for discrimination. Hittle asked the court to toss out McDonnell entirely or, alternatively, make it easier for employees to win under the third step. 'The court should take the opportunity to overrule this unworkable and egregiously wrong test without further delay,' Hittle's attorneys told the Supreme Court. The approach, they said, 'has rightly been criticized by judges and scholars alike.' A federal district court in California sided with the city and the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that decision. Hittle appealed to the Supreme Court in October.
