Legal Activity

Past Activities

Victory for Iowa Teacher Against Biblical Literalism

The Appignani Humanist Legal Center scored its first major victory in July 2008 when it obtained a settlement on behalf of a Southwestern Community College instructor fired in September 2007 for allegedly telling his Western Civilization class that the biblical story of Adam and Even should not be taken literally. In an interview with “Community College Week”, published October 8, 2007, Steven Bitterman stated: “I put the Hebrew religion on the same plane as any other religion.”

The Des Moines Register reported that Bitterman received a settlement in the amount of $20,000. The Appignani Humanist Legal Center contacted Bitterman in October 2007 and offered legal assistance. Subsequently, the Legal Center arranged for a local attorney, Brad Schroeder, to represent Bitterman and assisted throughout the process.

Click here to read AHA’s press release “One Humanist's Stand for Academic Freedom” announcing the Bitterman-SWCC settlement.

In one of the most important religion case before the Supreme Court since the Ten Commandment cases of 2005, the American Humanist Association submitted a friend of the court brief urging the Court to reverse the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit holding that Summum has a free speech right to put a monument of its aphorisms in a city park that already has a Ten Commandments monument.  Saying that the Court would be establishing the principle that “two wrongs make a right” if it affirmed the appeals court decision, the AHA made a novel request that the case be returned to the lower courts for the parties to brief and argue the question of whether the presence of the Ten Commandments monument in the park violates the Establishment Clause. (That issue was not before either the district or appellate court.)

Click here to read AHA’s brief in Pleasant Grove City v. Summum. The brief was filed on June 23, 2008. Click here to read AHA’s press release “Humanists File Legal Brief in Summum Case: No Permanent Religion in Public Parks” announcing the filing.

The American Humanist Association told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that it supports two Washington State Board of Pharmacy regulations requiring pharmacies to dispense all medications in a timely manner, including Plan B. The brief argues that protecting patients is a responsibility of the Board and that minimizing barriers to healthcare access is an appropriate and valid manner for fulfilling that responsibility. The brief further argues that requiring “pharmacies to serve all customers regardless of personal objection does not violate the free-exercise rights of those whose personal objections to dispensing happen to be religiously motivated.”

Click here to read the press release about Stormans, Inc. v. Selecky. The AHA signed on to the brief authored by Americans United for Separation of Church and State and filed March 11, 2008.

The AHLC's first solo litigation was filed on November 29, 2006, in the Florida Southern District Court. Attorney James Hurley, the AHLC lawyer serving as lead counsel, filed suit against the Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections on behalf of Plaintiff Jerry Rabinowitz, whose polling place was a church in Delray Beach, Florida. The church featured numerous religious symbols, including signs exhorting people to "Make a Difference with God" and anti-abortion posters, that clearly demonstrate a violation of the Establishment Clause.

The case was bolstered by a study released by Stanford University's Graduate School of Business, which found that environmental cues in polling locations have a measurable and significant impact on electoral results.

The defendant won summary judgment on July 31, 2007 and AHLC decided not to appeal the adverse decision.

AHLC continues to believe that houses of worship are inappropriate places for voters to cast ballots. We anticipate filing suit elsewhere on behalf of members who contact AHA to share their stories of voting in often extremely religious settings.

As churches are currently the most common polling location in America, the Rabinowitz decision is incredibly distressing to Humanists and others concerned with church-state separation. As the wall of separation seems to erode regularly, the effects of voting in a religious building cannot be ignored.

Complete Press Releases: http://www.humanistlegalcenter.org/cases/cp/cppressrelease.html.

Press Package: Complete Materials including Photos, Filing, and Summary Judgment.

Bloomfield, New Mexico

John Kistler, AHA member and Humanist activist, notified the AHLC in 2007 that the Bloomfield, New Mexico City Council planned to install a Ten Commandments monument on public land using private money. The AHLC sent the Mayor and City Council two letters demanding that the monument not be installed.

Matt Junker, a high school junior in San Diego, has been attempting to start an atheist student group at his public school. The school district claims that the group's name, Coalition of Heretical Radicals Implementing Scientific Truth, is misrepresented by the acronym C.H.R.I.S.T. Keeping in mind that this school already has a established group called C.I.A (Christians In Action), which also appears misrepresentative of the name since it has nothing to do with central intelligence, the AHLC has sent a letter to the school district. The matter became moot by Matt's graduation from high school.

Amicus Activity in Newdow and Mt. Soledad Cases

The AHLC submitted two amicus letters, both in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Our first amicus letter was filed on behalf of AHLC founding attorney Mike Newdow in his case Newdow et al. v. Carey et al. In our letter, we argued that the Elk Grove Unified School District and the Rio Linda Unified School District requirements that schoolchildren recite the monotheistic Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional. Our other amicus letter was on behalf of longtime AHA member Phil Paulson in Paulson et al. v. City of San Diego et al.; in it, we argued that the Mt. Soledad cross in the city of San Diego is an unconstitutional breach of the Establishment Clause and represents a clear preference for the monotheistic views of Christians.