U.S. District Court Allows Voting in Churches
July 31, 2007
Summary judgment was lost today in
Rabinowitz v. Anderson, the case launched by the Appignani Humanist Legal
Center (AHLC) in its constitutional test of voting in churches. The case was
filed November 29, 2006, in response to a specific abuse during the recent
midterm elections.
U.S. District Judge Donald L. Middlebrooks disagreed with the AHLC's
overwhelming evidence that the pervasive use of churches as polling stations
violates the constitutional principle of government neutrality on religion.
But the stakes in this case were unusually high. A decision favorable to the
AHLC could have set the wheels in motion to outlaw the use of churches as
polling places across the nation, resulting in the reassignment of polling
places from coast to coast. The judge didn't appear up to making that bold
move.
Judge Middlebrooks wrote, "This is not a case where a governmental actor
actively placed a religious icon or message at a voting location, or on
another piece of government property." He also said, "Voting in a secular
election, even in the presence of religious objects, is not equivalent to
state-sponsored prayer at a public school graduation." For the complete decision, go here.
"We're saddened by this decision," said Roy Speckhardt, executive director
of the American Humanist Association (AHA), "but the struggle isn't over. We
haven't ruled out an appeal in this case and will relaunch this case in
another jurisdiction, challenging a similar abuse. We have members all over
the United States who have answered our call to report these abuses or be
plaintiffs."
Churches are the most common polling locations in America. This means that,
during the process of voting, many citizens are surrounded on all sides by
religious symbolism and, sometimes, politicized religious propaganda. This
not only creates a religiously charged and politically biased atmosphere,
but it also serves to promote the specific church hosting the polls.
Rabinowitz v. Anderson highlighted this flagrant disregard of church-state
separation. The polling place of plaintiff Jerry Rabinowitz was at Emmanuel
Catholic Church in Delray Beach, Florida. Even before entering the voting
area he had to walk past a church-sponsored "pro-life" banner framed by
multiple crosses. Then, inside, where he checked in and where he voted,
Rabinowitz faced prominent religious symbols and slogans.
"Such a religiously-charged environment can serve to intimidate or unduly
influence a person's vote," added AHA president and constitutional law
professor Mel Lipman. "Recent studies reveal that environmental cues have a
measurable effect on electoral results. Therefore, the government must
provide a neutral setting for voters, free from religious or other
influences. Sadly, due to Judge Middlebrooks' decision, many barriers still
stand in the way of guaranteeing this kind of atmosphere on voting day for
all Americans."
The AHLC will continue to oppose the constant encroachments made on
church-state separation by the Religious Right under the administration of
George W. Bush. "Despite this setback, we will continue to send a clear
message to politicians at every level that violations of religious liberty
and church-state separation simply can't be tolerated," said Lipman. "We the
people value our religious and voting freedoms and will remain vigilant so
these freedoms are respected."
The Appignani Humanist Legal Center is part of the American Humanist
Association. Consisting of over two dozen humanist lawyers and backed by
humanists from coast to coast, it is the first nontheistic legal center in
the nation's capital.
For further information on this case, go to http://www.humanistlegalcenter.org/cases/cp/cppressrelease.html
