IN THE CAPITAL

Church & State, Nov 2004

High Court Agrees To Hear Commandments, Prisoner cases

The U.S. Supreme Court has decided to review three cases raising important religious liberty issues.

On Oct. 12, the justices accepted two lawsuits dealing with government display of the Ten Commandments and a third case challenging a federal law that requires prisons to respect the religious freedom of inmates.

The Commandments conflicts, which will be heard early next year, involve displays in Texas and Kentucky.

One case challenges a Commandments monument that has stood on the state capitol grounds in Austin, Texas, since 1961. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the display in Van Orden v. Perry, saying the monument contained a "nonsectarian version" of the Decalogue and noting that it had gone unchallenged for many years.

The Kentucky case deals with more recent Commandments displays at courthouses in McCreary and Pulaski counties. The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in McCreary v. ACLU that the posters were unconstitutional in part because of their "blatantly religious" content.

The Supreme Court also announced it would hear a challenge to the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, a 2000 law that requires states to accommodate prisoners' religious needs unless corrections officials can show a compelling reason not to, such as security concerns.

The case comes from Ohio, where prisoners who belong to minority religions say they have been denied access to religious literature and ceremonial items. The 6th Circuit invalidated the law in Cutter v. Wilkinson, saying it promoted religion at government expense.

Supreme Court Refuses Catholic Charities case

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to review a California court ruling that upheld a state law requiring religiously affiliated employers who provide prescription drug coverage to include birth control for women.

On Oct. 4, the high court refused to review a ruling that upheld a California law that requires employers, except churches, to pay for health benefits that also cover birth control.

Catholic Charities of Sacramento had challenged the law arguing that it violated the free exercise of religion by requiring it to subsidize contraceptives in violation of church teachings. The California Supreme Court ruled in March that the state law was a valid anti-discrimination measure that didn't interfere with religious beliefs or practices. (Americans United for Separation of Church and State filed a friend-of-the court brief with the California Supreme Court arguing that it should uphold the state law.)

A church-affiliated charity remains "free to express its disapproval of prescription contraceptives and to encourage its employees not to use them" provided they treat all their employees equally, the California Supreme Court ruled in Catholic Charities v. California.

The Associated Press reported that besides California, states that have similar laws include Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Iowa, Georgia, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Texas, Vermont and Washington.

Archbishop Takes Swipe At Church-State Separation

Politicians who refuse to create laws reflecting church doctrine too often use the separation of church and state as an excuse, claimed Boston Archbishop Sean P. O'Malley in an October sermon.

Offering a homily at the Red Mass at the Cathedral of St. Matthew in Washington, D.C., O'Malley decried today's lawmakers who refuse to shape law based on church dogma and blamed the First Amendment doctrine of church-state separation as part of the problem.

"Too often when politicians agree with the church's position on a given issue they say the church is prophetic and should be listened to, but if the church's position does not coincide with theirs, then they scream separation of church and state," declared O'Malley during the annual mass for members of the judiciary.

O'Malley bemoaned today's culture, describing it as "addicted to entertainment and obsessed with celebrities who have replaced our heroes and who hold up to our young people the false ideal of a chaotic, self-absorbed existence in frenzied pursuit of money, fame and pleasure."

The archbishop, who earlier in the year said lawmakers supportive of reproductive rights should not seek communion, urged the audience, which included Supreme Court Justices Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, "to help rebuild consensus around" certain "foundational principles necessary for democracy," such as "the inalienable right to life."