North Carolina Appeals Court Allows ACLU Lawsuit Over Court Swearing-in Practice to Go Forward
Posted on January 18, 2007
More of the ACLU “selective” appealing of cases upholding freedom of religion.
“A unanimous North Carolina Court of Appeals today ruled that the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina can proceed with its lawsuit challenging state courts’ practice of refusing to allow people of non-Christian faiths to swear religious oaths using any text other than the Christian Bible.
“We are very happy with the Court of Appeals’ decision today,” said Seth Cohen, General Counsel for the ACLU of North Carolina and lead counsel in this case. “This is an important issue that affects thousands of people of faith across North Carolina who are not of the Christian faith, and we look forward to a hearing on the Constitutional questions raised by this case.”
The ACLU filed the lawsuit in July 2005 in Superior Court in Wake County on behalf of the organization’s statewide membership of approximately 8,000 individuals of many different faiths, including Islam and Judaism. In November 2005, the ACLU added another plaintiff to the case, Syidah Mateen, a Muslim woman who was denied the option of using the Quran when she was being sworn in as a witness in a court proceeding in Guilford County. She was told that the only holy text used in the courtroom is the King James Version of the Bible.
In December 2005, a superior court judge dismissed the ACLU lawsuit, ruling that neither Mateen nor the ACLU could present a “case or controversy” that was ripe for judicial review - in other words, that the harm suffered by the plaintiffs in this case was too speculative to merit review by a court. Today, writing for a unanimous Court of Appeals, Chief Judge John Martin reversed the dismissal, allowing the case to proceed. Judges Elmore and Jackson joined in the opinion. The opinion is available online at: www.aoc.state.nc.us/www/public/coa/opinions/2007/060062-1.htm.
Key phrase in the said judgement:
” The sole issue presented by this appeal is whether either plaintiff has presented a justiciable controversy in their complaint. We conclude the complaint is sufficient to entitle both plaintiffs to litigate their claims under the Declaratory Judgment Act, though we are careful to express no opinion on the merits of those claims.
Basically the court ruled that that future litigation would be “unavoidable” thus the case should go forward to settle the matter (most likely at the Supreme Court level).
Yet I believe the ACLU may find this case to come back to haunt them when they go back to their usual MO and assail religious freedom of choice.
» Filed Under ACLU, Church And State
Trackback URL
Comments
4 Responses to “North Carolina Appeals Court Allows ACLU Lawsuit Over Court Swearing-in Practice to Go Forward”
-
Affiliations
The Giants
-
Donate
Steal Me
Our Store
Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
More blogs about the ACLU
That’s only because you have trouble distinguishing between Establishment and Expression cases. The only time they “assail religious freedom of choice” is when the “choice” is being made by a government body or one of its agents.
Actually I do know the difference, but the point still stands as the ACLU has passed over, or fought against other cases when other religions were primary. In point the ACLU almost never brings such an issue except when it is a Judeo/Christian issue.
I’m not aware of any establishment issues involving a non-Judeo-Christian religion. If you are, please cite them.
I wonder how long it will be before the ACLU will back that nonmuslims cannot testify against muslims!