No honor in his hometown: Jesus not welcome in Nazareth school

Alliance Defending Freedom filed a federal lawsuit Monday against a Pennsylvania school district on behalf of a 1st grade student and his parents. In February, Nazareth Area School District unconstitutionally prohibited the student from distributing St. Valentine’s Day cards to his classmates because the cards contained a note that mentioned God and included the Bible verse John 3:16 after a sentence about the history of St. Valentine’s Day.

“Public schools ought to encourage, not suppress, the free exchange of ideas, including those communicated through Valentine’s Day cards. A Bible verse and a reference to God does not make such a card unconstitutional,” said ADF Legal Counsel Matt Sharp. “Religious expression is just as protected by the First Amendment as other messages that students communicate.”

“To single out a faith-based message for censorship is exactly the type of hostility to religion that the First Amendment forbids,” added ADF Senior Legal Counsel Jeremy Tedesco. “We hope the school district will revise its policies to respect the constitutionally protected free speech of its students and make ongoing litigation unnecessary.”

In February, the parents of the 1st grader helped him assemble the cards for “Friendship Day,” the politically correct name the school district uses for St. Valentine’s Day. The cards included a note that stated, “Happy Valentine’s Day! St. Valentine was imprisoned and martyred for presiding over marriages and for spreading the news of God’s love. In honor of St. Valentine’s Day, I want you to know that God loves you!!! ‘God so loved the world that He gave His only son, so that everyone who believes in Him might not perish but have eternal life.’ John 3:16.”

When the student arrived with his cards at Floyd R. Shafer Elementary School in Nazareth, his teacher noticed the faith-based notes and brought them to the attention of the school’s principal, William Mudlock. Mudlock ordered them removed because of their religious nature and because they contained a Bible verse, telling the student’s parents that they could be “offensive” to others.

At a meeting with the student’s parents, Mudlock explained that the child’s note sought to “establish the supremacy” of his faith over others as prohibited by school district policy. He pointed to NASD Policy 220 on “Unprotected Student Expression,” which states that the school officials can prohibit student expression that seeks “to establish the supremacy of a particular religious denomination, sect or point of view.”

The complaint filed in J.A. v. Nazareth Area School District with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania explains that the same federal court struck down an identically worded policy at another Pennsylvania school district in 2008, saying that such policies “restrict what effectively amounts to all religious speech, which is clearly not permissible under the First Amendment.”

Ted Hoppe, one of nearly 2,300 attorneys allied with Alliance Defending Freedom, is serving as local counsel in the case.

ADF: Atheists’ lawsuit against national motto should be thrown out

NEW YORK — Alliance Defending Freedom filed a friend-of-the-court brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit Thursday in support of the use of the national motto, “In God We Trust,” on U.S. coins and currency. Last February, a group of atheists filed a lawsuit against the federal government that claims the use of the national motto on money is unconstitutional even though it is a practice that has deep roots in American history and federal courts have repeatedly upheld it as constitutional.

The Alliance Defending Freedom brief explains that merely being offended is not a sufficient legal cause (known as “standing”) on which to file a lawsuit attacking the national motto.

“Americans shouldn’t be forced to abandon their religious heritage simply to appease someone’s political agenda,” said Litigation Counsel Rory Gray. “Courts have repeatedly ruled that the national motto, ‘In God We Trust,’ is constitutional and can be used on U.S. currency, and that is the correct conclusion. In addition to the fact that numerous courts have already rejected the lawsuit’s claims, those bringing this suit can’t do so simply because they are offended by a historical phrase.”

As the Alliance Defending Freedom brief filed in Newdow v. United States of America explains, the government’s expenditure of tax dollars to create coins and currency is “a secular government function” that does not further any religious ends. The brief also notes that “ideological frustration” or “subjective feelings of offense and alienation” are not legitimate reasons to file a lawsuit. “Federal courts are not forums for the ventilation of public grievances,” the brief says.

“The emotional response of offended atheists does not amount to a violation of the Establishment Clause,” added Senior Legal Counsel Jeremy Tedesco. “This lawsuit is based on a deep misunderstanding of the First Amendment. It should be dismissed.”
Joseph Ruta, one of nearly 2,300 attorneys allied with Alliance Defending Freedom, is local counsel for ADF.

Hawaii Churches Prevail Against Atheists Baseless’ Lawsuit

HONOLULU — A Hawaii court has dismissed two churches from a lawsuit that two atheists brought against five congregations in the Aloha State. Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys represent the two churches, One Love Ministries and Calvary Chapel Central Oahu, which the atheists falsely accused of defrauding the government.

The suit claimed the churches committed fraud by paying substandard rent to the public schools in which they meet even though the school districts agree that the churches have consistently paid all agreed-upon rents. The court found that atheists Mitchell Kahle and Holly Huber failed to sufficiently allege any evidence of fraud.

“Congregations serving the neediest in their communities should be welcomed, not driven out by bogus accusations resulting from a clear hostility to churches,” said Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Legal Counsel Erik Stanley, who argued before the court last month. “The churches have been completely honest and have paid all required rent to the schools. The court has rightly thrown out this lawsuit and its invented claims against our clients.”

“These churches have not only faithfully paid all of their rent, they’ve given even more in service and funding to the schools and communities they love,” added co-counsel James Hochberg of Honolulu, one of nearly 2,300 allied attorneys with Alliance Defending Freedom. “Honestly, these churches are the exact opposite of how they are being characterized in this baseless lawsuit. It has been a shameful attack upon people completely undeserving of such animosity.”

Kahle and Huber filed their suit, Kahle v. New Hope International Ministries, with Hawaii’s Circuit Court of the First Circuit under the state’s False Claims Act. The law allows “whistleblowers” with inside information to expose fraudulent billing by government contractors; however, the lawsuit failed to sufficiently allege that the churches submitted any false statement to defraud the government. The two atheists can amend their complaint within 45 days of the dismissal order if they are able to cite any such fraud.

Alliance Defending Freedom is an alliance-building, non-profit legal organization that advocates for the right of people to freely live out their faith.

Courtesy of http://www.adfmedia.org/News/PRDetail/8721

Florida School Bans Easter Egg Hunt Fliers

TAMPA, Fla. — Alliance Defense Fund attorneys filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of a 4th-grade Florida student Tuesday after his school prohibited him from handing out Easter egg hunt fliers to fellow students during non-instructional time. School officials contend that students “are not allowed to pass out fliers related to religious events or activities” because of two school board policies that the lawsuit challenges as unconstitutional.

“All students should have the freedom to express a message consistent with their beliefs,” said ADF Litigation Staff Counsel Matt Sharp. “To say that an Easter Egg hunt invitation offered from one student to another during non-instructional time is somehow not allowed in America is preposterous. ADF has litigated numerous cases similar to this one, and the law is clear: invitations like this are protected by the Constitution. We encourage the school board to change its policies accordingly.”

In March, the mother of a student at Roland H. Lewis Elementary in Temple Terrace together with other members of the student’s church organized several neighborhood Easter egg hunts for children and their parents in the community. At each Easter egg hunt, children would participate in an egg hunt, play games, have snacks and candy, and hear the biblical story of Easter.

The student and his mother developed simple invitations that he could hand out to other students at school during non-instructional time for the Easter egg hunt that his mother helped organize in his neighborhood, but the school’s principal denied him permission to distribute them even though the school routinely allows other types of invitations, such as for birthday parties.

The ADF lawsuit challenges two Hillsborough County School Board policies behind the Easter egg hunt invitation ban: one that states that fliers distributed by students for religious events “may not contain a proselytizing message (i.e., promote the benefits of the specific religion)” and another policy that prohibits materials that “seek to establish the supremacy of a particular religious denomination, sect, or point of view over any other religious denomination, sect, or point of view.”

“The two board policies are unconstitutional because they ban non-disruptive student-to-student speech based solely on its religious content,” said ADF Legal Counsel Jeremy Tedesco. “Public schools should encourage, not shut down, the free exchange of ideas. Marginalizing students of faith removes an important influence for good from the school community, and removing their voice sends a message to all students that religion is something to be ashamed of.”

David Gibbs, one of more than 2,100 attorneys in the ADF alliance, is serving as local counsel in the case, Gilio v. The School Board of Hillsborough County, filed with the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division.

• Pronunciation guide: Tedesco (Tuh-DESS’-ko)

ADF is a legal alliance of Christian attorneys and like-minded organizations defending the right of people to freely live out their faith. Launched in 1994, ADF employs a unique combination of strategy, training, funding, and litigation to protect and preserve religious liberty, the sanctity of life, marriage, and the family.

 

www.adfmedia.org |

Alliance Defense Fund to Alabama school: Don’t silence ‘Silent Night’ in Christmas program

TUSCUMBIA, Ala. — The Alliance Defense Fund sent a letterThursday to an Alabama school district to explain that it should not remove the traditional Christmas carol “Silent Night” from a Christmas program at one of its schools. The letter explains that demands made by Americans United for Separation for Church and State for the removal of the song are baseless.“It’s ridiculous that people have to think twice about whether it’s okay to include ‘Silent Night’ in a Christmas program,” said ADF Senior Counsel David Cortman. “An overwhelming majority of Americans agree that it’s okay to celebrate Christmas in schools and in the public square, and they are right. There is nothing unconstitutional about inclusion of this song in the school’s program, and that is supported by how the courts have consistently ruled.”

AU sent a letter to Tuscumbia City Schools complaining about inclusion of “Silent Night” as one of nine songs in G.W. Trenholm School’s Christmas program. AU apparently claimed that inclusion of the song or any other religious song would be unconstitutional.

“The school should not succumb to pressure from the faulty legal demands of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, which spends its time threatening and intimidating school districts with disinformation to further its own constitutionally incorrect agenda,” said ADF Litigation Staff Counsel Matt Sharp.

The ADF letter disputes AU’s claims and points out several court cases that have upheld the inclusion of religious Christmas carols in school Christmas programs.

“Here, ‘Silent Night’ is but one of the nine other songs included in the Christmas program at G.W. Trenholm,” the ADF letter explains. “Thus, as long as the inclusion of ‘Silent Night’ or any other religious Christmas song is based upon a secular reason–i.e. recognition of the religious heritage of Christmas–then the Constitution does not prohibit the inclusion of the religious song in the school’s Christmas program.”

The Alliance Defense Fund offers a free legal memo that explains the constitutionally protected rights of students, teachers, and public schools to seasonal religious expression.

ADF is a legal alliance of Christian attorneys and like-minded organizations defending the right of people to freely live out their faith. Launched in 1994, ADF employs a unique combination of strategy, training, funding, and litigation to protect and preserve religious liberty, the sanctity of life, marriage, and the family.

 

www.adfmedia.org

Short fuse on Long Island for religious student clubs

CENTRAL ISLIP, N.Y. — Alliance Defense Fund attorneys filed a lawsuit Monday on behalf of a student-led Christian club against the Hicksville Union Free School District for denying recognition to the group because of supposed “budgetary concerns.” More than 35 other clubs are officially recognized at Hicksville High School, where the principal stated, “other schools may have [a Christian club], but I don’t want this in my school.” The new case is the third one filed by ADF attorneys over the last three years against Long Island school districts for unconstitutionally banning student-led Christian clubs. The other two suits resulted in ADF gaining official recognition for clubs at Lindenhurst Union Free School District and Half Hollow Hills Central School District. “Public schools cannot ban Christian student clubs simply because they are religious,” said ADF Senior Counsel David Cortman. “If officials at government-run schools did their homework, they’d know that students have a constitutionally protected right to express their beliefs. It’s ridiculous that Hicksville High School says it has no budget for a Christian club but somehow has enough for a ping pong club.” In October of last year, two students requested official recognition for the Frontline Club at Hicksville High, notifying officials that they had 12 students willing to be active members in the Christian club and a teacher willing to serve as its required faculty advisor. Principal Brijinder Singh denied their request and said she would not allow any religious clubs to receive official recognition. When students noted that 12 other schools in Nassau County had Christian clubs, Singh replied, “Other schools may have it [Christian clubs], but I don’t want this in my school.” In response to a letter from the students’ parents, Singh claimed that limited finances at the school district, which has a budget of $117 million, precluded any religious club from being recognized. Yet, the district had sufficient finances to continue to grant full benefits to clubs such as the Ping Pong Club, Key Club, Interact Club, Ski Club, Model United Nations Club, and Mock Trial Club. Unlike the Frontline Club, the other clubs are all able to access facilities before and after school, make announcements, post fliers and ads for club activities, conduct field trips during the school day, raise funds, and participate in Homecoming Week activities, among other activities. Over the years, numerous students have sought to have a Christian club established at the school but have been repeatedly denied by Singh. In a 2008 request denial, she said that any religious club must be “multi-faith,” open to all religions, and must allow non-believers to lead the club. Robert W. Dapelo, one of more than 2,000 attorneys in the ADF alliance, is serving as local counsel in the lawsuit Frontline Club v. Board of Education of the Hicksville Union Free School District, which was filed with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

ADF is a legal alliance of Christian attorneys and like-minded organizations defending the right of people to freely live out their faith. Launched in 1994, ADF employs a unique combination of strategy, training, funding, and litigation to protect and preserve religious liberty, the sanctity of life, marriage, and the family. http://www.adfmedia.org | twitter.com/adfmedia

ADF encourages governors to ignore activist groups, observe 2011 National Day of Prayer

SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. — The Alliance Defense Fund issued letters to be received by governors across the U.S. Monday urging them to observe and participate in the 60th Annual National Day of Prayer on May 5. The letter also encourages the governors to resist the demands of activist groups that claim the tradition is unlawful. Millions of Americans and thousands of local leaders participate in this constitutional event every year.

“America’s founders participated in public prayer activities; public officials today should be able to do the same,” said ADF Senior Counsel Kevin Theriot. “Local observances of the National Day of Prayer are constitutional and appropriate, particularly since the event simply provides all Americans an opportunity to pray voluntarily according to their own faith–and does not promote any particular religion or form of religious observance.” 

“In 1952, President Harry Truman signed into law a joint resolution by Congress to ‘set aside an appropriate day as a National Day of Prayer,’” the ADF letter to governors states. “In 1988, the law was amended by Congress and signed by President Ronald Reagan to specify that the annual event should be observed on ‘the first Thursday in May in each year.’”  Yet atheists and activist groups have challenged the constitutionality of government entities to recognize the event, claiming their acknowledgement violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. 

“You can be confident that your participation in and acknowledgement of the National Day of Prayer are constitutionally protected activities,” ADF attorneys explain in the letter. “You are free to proclaim your support for this event, and you are under no obligation to satisfy the demands of any disgruntled individual or civil libertarian group that may oppose such action.”

From the time of this nation’s founding, public prayer has been an essential part of America’s culture and tradition. The tradition of designating an official day of prayer actually began with the Continental Congress in 1775, and on October 3, 1789, President George Washington issued a National Day of Thanksgiving Proclamation. Ever since, American presidents have made similar proclamations and “appeals to the Almighty.” ADF attorneys contend that proclamations and appeals of state and local officials are no different. Historically, all 50 governors, along with U.S. presidents, have issued proclamations in honor of the National Day of Prayer.

ADF attorneys note that the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly acknowledged that presidential proclamations of thanksgiving and prayer, including the NDOP, are part of our heritage, and in no way violate the Constitution.

“A decision last year [in the lawsuit Freedom From Religion Foundation v. Obama by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin] does nothing to change this law,” ADF attorneys assured in the letter. “The judge determined that the President of the United States is not prohibited from issuing a proclamation declaring a National Day of Prayer. She did hold that a federal law instructing the President to do so on a particular day is unconstitutional, but she stayed enforcement of her ruling till the matter could be appealed. That case is currently pending before the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.”

• Pronunciation guide: Theriot (TARE’-ee-oh)

ADF is a legal alliance of Christian attorneys and like-minded organizations defending the right of people to freely live out their faith. Launched in 1994, ADF employs a unique combination of strategy, training, funding, and litigation to protect and preserve religious liberty, the sanctity of life, marriage, and the family.

 

www.adfmedia.org | twitter.com/adfmedia

County drops strip-searches for pro-life protesters

By Bob Unruh
© 2011 WorldNetDaily

A Maryland county has agreed to change its procedures so that peaceful, pro-life protesters no longer are strip-searched and shackled to shut them up, according to a report from the Alliance Defense Fund.

The organization has been working for several years on the litigation since the incident developed in 2008.

According to the claim filed on behalf of about 18 pro-life protesters, authorities violated the U.S. Constitution when they first ordered the protesters off of county property, then later when protesters complied and moved to city property, swooped down on them in seven police cars, shackled, strip-searched and jailed them.

The agreement provides for the county and several individuals to be dismissed as defendants based on the promised change in policy. Claims against other defendants remain.

The arrest of pro-life protesters is being challenged in court

The ADF said the county “agreed to a policy change to ensure that peaceful protesters will be protected from undergoing strip searches at the county detention center.”

“Pro-life advocates should certainly not be strip searched for peacefully expressing their beliefs,” said Daniel Blomberg, litigation counsel for the ADF. “The county did the right thing by changing its policy so that pro-life advocates will no longer be subjected to such needless and embarrassing searches for lawfully exercising their First Amendment protected right to free speech.” 

On that day in August 2008, at least a dozen state, county and city police officers handcuffed 18 participants in an annual Defend Life “Face the Truth” Pro-Life Tour.

The participants started their peaceful event along a public road in Harford County. Later, however, the group relocated to public property in the town of Bel Air, where they had been several times in past tours, after being told by state troopers to leave the county for not having a county permit to engage in free speech activities. The officers then arrested them in Bel Air without explanation.

Once in custody, the young women who had been arrested – at least two of whom were teenagers – were subjected to two rounds of strip searches, according to the ADF.

Only after the strip searches and a night spent in jail were they told why they were arrested. A week after their release, the state dropped the charges of loitering, disorderly conduct and failure to obey a lawful order that had been filed.

The county later confirmed, too, that there is no requirement for a “permit” as the protesters had been told.

WND reported earlier when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit rejected the claim by police officers that they were immune from the lawsuit.

Read more: County drops strip-searches for pro-life protesters http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=275649#ixzz1GrSqqwEJ

Florida A&M unconstitutionally shuts down Christian student group

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — The Alliance Defense Fund sent officials of Florida A&M University a letter Tuesday urging them to reinstate a Christian student group they de-recognized in January and banned from engaging in activities on campus. Officials revoked the student group’s active status based on a finding that the club violated a constitutionally problematic rule that prohibits student groups from meeting, holding events, and hosting functions unless a university-appointed advisor is present at all times.

“Christian student clubs shouldn’t be kicked off campus because of a public university policy that imposes such a severe restriction on the right of students to speak or even meet on campus,” said ADF Legal Counsel Jeremy Tedesco. “There is simply no constitutionally valid justification for a policy that bans student meetings and speech unless a government employee is present the entire time the meeting or speech occurs.”

In January, Florida A&M officials placed the student group “Commissioned 2 Love” on “inactive status” because the club’s advisor was not present at all of the group’s gatherings. The Florida A&M Student Handbook states that student organization advisors, who are assigned by the university and not chosen by the clubs themselves, must “attend and remain present for the duration of all organizational meetings, official functions, and sponsored activities.”

According to the ADF letter, this requirement is unconstitutional because it gives university employees complete and unbridled discretion over whether a student group’s meeting or speech will occur.

The letter also points out that the university’s policies violate the Constitution because they “compel student organizations to associate with government employees who they may not want to associate with, and who in fact may be adverse to the group’s mission and expression. Even worse, the students are not given the authority to select their own advisors, but rather the Associate Vice President for Student Life appoints advisors for student organizations…. FAMU’s policies are particularly egregious violations of the right to association, since they require the government employee with whom student organizations must associate to…‘[p]rovide counseling, leadership and direction regarding…the mission of the club or organization.’”

“This means that the university can appoint an atheist to oversee a Christian group, a meat-eater to advise a vegetarian group, or a Republican to provide direction to the College Democrats,” Tedesco explained. “The policy is both unconstitutional and absurd.”

In a January e-mail to Commissioned 2 Love, the university advised the club that it had been deactivated for violating the university’s advisor policy and ordered that “no meetings, events, activities, or gatherings of any type take place prior to Fall 2011 semester certification period.”  As a result, Commissioned 2 Love has ceased to exist in any meaningful way on campus.

In its letter, ADF urges Florida A&M to immediately reinstate the club as a recognized student organization and to amend or eliminate their unconstitutional policies. 

• ADF “Speak Up” University website

ADF is a legal alliance of Christian attorneys and like-minded organizations defending the right of people to freely live out their faith. Launched in 1994, ADF employs a unique combination of strategy, training, funding, and litigation to protect and preserve religious liberty, the sanctity of life, marriage, and the family.

 

www.adfmedia.org | twitter.com/adfmedia

California school bans Christian 5th grader’s talent show performance because his song says Jesus too many times

 

LOS ANGELES — Alliance Defense Fund attorneys filed a lawsuit Friday against Los Angeles Unified School District officials on behalf of a 5th-grade student who was prohibited from performing interpretive movement to a song at a school talent show scheduled for Feb. 4 because of the song’s religious lyrics. Students were permitted to choose the content of their performances–some approved performances include songs discussing teenage “love,” relationship problems, dancing, and violent imagery–yet Superior Street Elementary School officials refused to allow the 5th-grader’s selected song, which also discusses singing, dancing, and celebrating from a religious perspective, because it allegedly violates the so-called “separation of church and state” and is considered “offensive.”

“Christian students shouldn’t be censored at public elementary schools because of their beliefs,” said ADF Senior Counsel David Cortman. “When religious content is censored by a public school while the content of other performances discussing similar topics is allowed, we have a major violation of a student’s constitutional rights.”

Several days after the Jan. 14 audition for the annual Superior Street Elementary School Talent Show–which had no content restrictions on the songs, dances, or other talents that the elementary students were permitted to perform, the mother was told by SSES Principal Jerilyn Schubert that her child was not permitted to perform to the song “We Shine” because of its religious message, which she considered “offensive” and a violation of the “separation of church and state.” 

When the concerned parent explained that the song represents her child–who selected the song and practiced for months –and not the school, and that there were no restrictions on what students could perform in the show, Schubert asserted that other students performing songs with profane and vulgar lyrics were also told to select different songs… in essence equating religious lyrics with profanity and vulgarity. Schubert went on to ask the mother why her child couldn’t “pick a song that does not say ‘Jesus’ so many times?”

The show takes place in the evening, the community is invited to attend, and students are not required to attend.  Songs approved by officials for the show are “Freak the Freak Out,” focusing on relationship problems, “Shake It Up,” with the theme of dancing and celebrating, and “Eye of the Tiger,” with lyrics stating that “we kill with the skill to survive.”

Daniel R. Watkins of Newport Beach, one of nearly 1,900 attorneys in the ADF alliance, is serving as local counsel in the lawsuit B.H. v. Garcia, which was filed with the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Western Division- Los Angeles.
 

• Example of interpretive movement

ADF is a legal alliance of Christian attorneys and like-minded organizations defending the right of people to freely live out their faith. Launched in 1994, ADF employs a unique combination of strategy, training, funding, and litigation to protect and preserve religious liberty, the sanctity of life, marriage, and the family.

 

www.adfmedia.org | twitter.com/adfmedia