VICTORY: Kountze Cheerleaders Win at Texas Appeals Court

Source: First Liberty

Washington, D.C. - October 9, 2017 - (The Ponder News) -- In yet another win and precedent for private speech protected by the First Amendment, the Texas Court of Appeals for the Ninth District last week ruled in favor of the Kountze, TX cheerleaders who were banned from including Bible verses on run-through banners at football games. The school district prohibited the banners after receiving a demand letter from the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF), and was also supported by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

“This is another great victory for the free speech and religious liberty rights of all Texas students,” Kelly Shackelford, President and CEO of First Liberty Institute, stated in a press release. “Hopefully this ruling will bring clarity and closure to this issue for all Texas students and schools.”

“We are pleased that once again religious liberty is vindicated and that cheerleaders across the state of Texas have the right to have religious messages on banners at high school football games,” stated Hiram Sasser, General Counsel to First Liberty. “No school district should be able to censor, ban, or claim ownership of the private religious speech of its students.”

CHEERLEADERS PAINT VERSES ON BANNERS…AND THE FFRF TAKES NOTICE

The case began back in 2012, when cheerleaders in Kountze, Texas, decided to paint Bible verses on run-through banners for football games. The Wisconsin-based FFRF, however, caught wind of what the cheerleaders were doing and sent a letter to the school district. The Kountze ISD responded by banning the cheerleaders from painting the verses on the banners.

The cheerleaders decided to stand up for their religious freedom rights. First Liberty and volunteer attorney David Starnes filed a lawsuit on their behalf and won at the district court level.

At that point, the school district appealed, with the ACLU filing a brief in support of Kountze ISD. The school district decided to allow the banners, and the court of appeals declared the case moot. However, the school district still claimed the cheerleaders’ banners to be government speech subject to the school’s censorship.

First Liberty, with Starnes and Jim Ho of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, as lead counsel, appealed the mootness ruling to the Texas Supreme Court. First Liberty asked the Texas Supreme Court to review the case and reaffirm the cheerleaders’ rights.

U.S. Senators Ted Cruz and John Cornyn filed an amicus brief in support of the cheerleaders, and so did Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton.

VICTORY FOR THE CHEERLEADERS

In January 2016, the Texas Supreme Court ruled  8-0 in favor of the cheerleaders and remanded the case back to the Ninth District. Then, on September 28, 2017, the Ninth District ruled completely in favor of the cheerleaders.

In his opinion, Justice Charles Kreger of the Ninth District wrote that “the Cheerleaders’ speech…is best characterized as the pure private speech of the students.”

“All these cheerleaders have ever wanted is the opportunity to cheer on their classmates with a message of their own choosing and their own faith,” David Starnes stated in the press release issued the same day as the ruling. “Today’s decision provides just that opportunity.”

The ruling also demonstrates the power of legal precedent. The opinion cited many precedents, including two First Liberty cases: Morgan v. Swanson (better known as the Plano “Candy Cane Case” ) and the case of Pounds v. Katy ISD.

In the “Candy Cane Case,” the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld the religious freedom rights of elementary students banned by school officials from giving religiously-themed gifts at Christmastime. Justice Kreger included several quotes from Morgan v. Swanson in his analysis of the Kountze case.

STUDENTS HAVE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AT SCHOOL

As U.S. Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas wrote in his famous Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969) opinion, “It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”

First Liberty Institute is committed to protecting religious freedom in the sphere of education and has successfully represented clients from elementary school to the university level. For more information about religious liberty in the public schools, download First Liberty’s free Religious Liberty Protection Kit for Students and Teachers.

Trump Instructs DOJ to Protect Religious Freedom

Source: Liberty Counsel

Washington, D.C. - October 9, 2017 - (The Ponder News) -- The Trump administration strongly protected the free exercise of religion by reversing Obama-era policies with new legal guidance issued to the Department of Justice (DOJ) by Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

The Attorney General issued two memoranda. The first addressed to all administrative agencies and executive departments, identifies 20 key principles of religious liberty. The guidance reminds agencies of their obligations under federal law to protect religious liberty, and summarizes twenty key principles of religious-liberty protections that agencies can use in that effort. It explains that agencies should use these principles to protect religious liberty in all aspects of their work, including as employers, rule-makers, adjudicators, contract- and grant-makers and program administrators.

On specific policies, the guidance states that government may not exclude religious organizations from secular aid programs and the IRS may not enforce the Johnson Amendment which restricts tax-exempt organizations, including churches and religious organizations, from endorsing or opposing candidates for elected office.

Attorney Sessions’ second memorandum, addressed to DOJ components and United States Attorney’s offices, directs the implementation of that guidance within the Department.

The 20 key principles are:

1. The freedom of religion is a fundamental right of paramount importance, expressly protected by federal law.

2. The free exercise of religion includes the right to act or abstain from action in accordance with one's religious beliefs.

3. The freedom of religion extends to persons and organizations.

4. Americans do not give up their freedom of religion by participating in the marketplace, partaking of the public square, or interacting with government.

5. Government may not restrict acts or abstentions because of the beliefs they display.

6. Government may not target religious individuals or entities for special disabilities based on their religion.

7. Government may not target religious individuals or entities through discriminatory enforcement of neutral, generally applicable laws.

8. Government may not officially favor or disfavor particular religious groups.

9. Government may not interfere with the autonomy of a religious organization.

10. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 prohibits the federal government from substantially burdening any aspect of religious observance or practice, unless imposition of that burden on a particular religious adherent satisfies strict scrutiny.

11. RFRA's protection extends not just to individuals, but also to organizations, associations, and at least some for-profit corporations.

12. RFRA does not permit the federal government to second-guess the reasonableness of a
religious belief.

13. A governmental action substantially burdens an exercise of religion under RFRA if it bans an aspect of an adherent's religious observance or practice, compels an act inconsistent with that observance or practice, or substantially pressures the adherent to modify such observance or practice.

14. The strict scrutiny standard applicable to RFRA is exceptionally demanding.

15. RFRA applies even where a religious adherent seeks an exemption from a legal obligation requiring the adherent to confer benefits on third parties.

16. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, prohibits covered employers from discriminating against individuals on the basis of their religion.

17. Title VIl's protection extends to discrimination on the basis of religious observance or practice as well as belief, unless the employer cannot reasonably accommodate such observance or practice without undue hardship on the business.

18. The Clinton Guidelines on Religious Exercise and Religious Expression in the Federal Workplace provide useful examples for private employers of reasonable accommodations for religious observance and practice in the workplace.

19. Religious employers are entitled to employ only persons whose beliefs and conduct are consistent with the employers' religious precepts.

20. As a general matter, the federal government may not condition receipt of a federal grant or contract on the effective relinquishment of a religious organization’s exemptions or attributes of its religious character.

The DOJ earlier this year demonstrated a shift in policy from the Obama administration as it commented on Zarda v. Altitude Express at the U.S. Federal Court of Appeals, which contends that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 bans gender discrimination, but does not include sexual orientation or gender identity, in the workplace. The guidance today demonstrates further that the DOJ recognizes that religious liberty principles are in fact stalwart even when challenged by special interest groups.

“We commend President Trump for instructing Attorney General Jeff Sessions to send a strong message to the rest of America that religious freedom must be protected,” said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel. “The President has reversed the Obama-era policies and committed to protecting and promoting the religious freedom upon which this nation was founded. The Department of Justice must now vigorously enforce all Americans’ civil right of free exercise of religious liberty. This is an extremely positive step in the right direction,” said Staver.

Liberty Counsel is an international nonprofit, litigation, education, and policy organization dedicated to advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of life, and the family since 1989, by providing pro bono assistance and representation on these and related topics.

Brady Statement on September 2017 Jobs Report

Source: House Ways and Means Committee

Washington, D.C. - October 9, 2017 - (The Ponder News) -- House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady (R-TX) released the following statement in response to the Labor Department’s September 2017 jobs report:

“It’s clear from this jobs report that Hurricanes Harvey and Irma not only devastated communities in Texas and Florida, they devastated their local economies as well. Record-high flooding, wind gusts, and power outages kept thousands of Americans from going to work and earning a paycheck – money they desperately need to recover from these disasters,

“As Congress and President Trump continue working to help those hurt by recent hurricanes regain their strength, we’re also taking action on transformational tax reform that will grow our economy and help Americans of all walks of life. By passing a budget that paves the way for tax reform, the House took a major step yesterday toward creating more jobs, fairer taxes, and bigger paychecks. In the weeks ahead, the Ways and Means Committee will move forward with pro-growth, pro-middle-class tax reform legislation that Congress will ultimately send to the President’s desk this year, for the first time in 31 years.”

Note: The U.S. Department of Labor reported today that the economy lost 33,000 jobs in September and the unemployment rate was 4.2 percent. The jobs report covers the 50 states and District of Columbia, but not Puerto Rico or the U.S. Virgin Islands.

GOWDY AND CUMMINGS APPLAUD NEW WEBSITE TO IMPROVE PUBLIC’S ACCESS TO INFO ABOUT FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

Source: House Committee on Oversight and Governmental Reform

Washington, D.C. - October 9, 2017 - (The Ponder News) -- House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy and Ranking Member Elijah Cummings issued the following statement applauding a new website,  Oversight.gov, launched yesterday by the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE):

“We welcome the release of Oversight.gov, a new website that allows the public to access thousands of Inspector General reports across the federal government through a central, searchable repository,” said Gowdy and Cummings. “This site will lead to greater accountability for agencies, more savings to taxpayers, and increased transparency into the IGs’ critical work in identifying and exposing waste, fraud, and abuse throughout the federal government.  We thank CIGIE and the Offices of Inspectors General for their hard work in developing this website and their ongoing efforts on behalf of the American people.”

Oversight.gov is a central online location where users can access thousands of reports contributed by over sixty Inspectors General across government.  By creating a single repository, Oversight.gov enables the public and government officials to more easily access and search IG reports, audits, and recommendations across agencies and programs.

Inspectors General play a critical role in identifying and exposing waste, fraud, and abuse throughout the federal government.

The website can be reached by clicking here

Chairman Diane Black Praises Passage of Budget in the House

Source: House Budget Committee

Washington, D.C. - October 9, 2017 - (The Ponder News) -- House Budget Committee Chairman Diane Black issued the following statement after the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.Con.Res. 71, the fiscal year 2018 budget resolution—Building a Better America.

“I am proud that the House supported a budget that reflects responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars and reassures the American people that we are committed to effective governing. It is a plan that achieves balance in 10 years, strengthens our military, promotes economic growth and unlocks pro-growth tax reform. While passage of this budget is just one of several steps toward priorities becoming realities, meaningful and lasting reforms cannot be achieved by skipping steps in the process. Today, I am pleased that members of the House continued doing our part by passing a plan for ensuring a bright and better future for generations to come.

Bump Stocks

Washington, D.C. - October 9, 2017 - (The Ponder News) -- Executive Director of Gun Owners of America (GOA) Erich Pratt issued the following statement on GOA's position on bump stocks:

"Gun Owners of America opposes a ban on bump stocks. Bump stocks were approved by the ATF during the Obama administration to help gun owners with disabilities fire their weapons.  Any type of ban will be ignored by criminals and only serve to disarm honest citizens.  Perhaps that’s why 91 percent of police believe a so-called “assault weapons” ban will have no effect or a negative effect on crime.  And given that 95 percent of cops think that a ban on large capacity magazines would be ineffective in reducing violent crime, it’s hard to imagine they would regard bump stocks any differently.

It's sad to see some Republicans quickly call for a vote on gun control, while delaying a vote on concealed carry reciprocity, H.R. 38. This is bipartisan legislation which will protect concealed carriers while they travel and which has been cosponsored by 212 law makers. If law makers want a vote on bump stocks, they should vote on reciprocity as well."

Many have called the Illinois State Rifle Association office regarding “bump stocks” and other such devices.  These devices were approved by the BATFE under President Obama and Attorney General Holder.  It is the Illinois State Rifle Association’s suggestion that the BATFE review their ruling, open up a comment period and re-address their ruling.

In response to the senseless attack in Las Vegas, the Second Amendment Foundation and Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms have issued the following statement:

“The Second Amendment Foundation and Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms support a productive dialogue concerning “bump stocks,” National Concealed Carry Reciprocity and the proposed Hearing Protection Act.

“We recognize that banning firearms accessories is not a solution to violent crime.”

Secretary Shulkin’s taxpayer-funded European vacation

Source: American Federation of Government Employees

American Federation of Government Employees National President J. David Cox Sr. released the following statement in response to a Washington Post report regarding Veterans Affairs Secretary David Shulkin’s travel expenses:

“Veterans Affairs Secretary David Shulkin should be ashamed of himself for traveling to Europe with his wife at taxpayers’ expense – especially as the VA grapples with funding shortfalls that undermine veterans’ care.

“Mr. Shulkin needs to explain to veterans who are waiting for doctors’ appointments how attending a Wimbledon tennis match, touring Westminster Abbey, and cruising along the River Thames with his wife helped them get treated faster.

“He also needs to explain to VA employees, many of whom are veterans, why he ordered a crackdown on their travel just two weeks before going on his taxpayer-funded European vacation. With 49,000 staffing vacancies to fill, our nation’s veterans and the Veterans Affairs staff deserve to know how Secretary Shulkin intends on improving services at the VA.

“President Trump came to Washington with a promise to drain the swamp. He needs to start by holding his own Cabinet officials accountable to the public they serve.”

Pennsylvania Pastors Network Leader Says Lehigh County Must Stand for Constitutional Law After Judge Rules Cross Must Be Removed from Seal

Source: American Pastors Network

Washington, D.C. - October 8, 2017 - (The Ponder News) -- A federal judge last week ruled that a cross must be removed from the Lehigh County seal in Pennsylvania because it is violates the U.S. Constitution, reported Fox News and several other outlets.

The Freedom From Religion Foundation filed the suit on behalf on four Pennsylvania residents, who claimed the cross was offensive. According to Fox News, U.S. District Judge Edward Smith “made it known in his ruling that he was not happy about the decision he had to make but was following the rule of constitutional law, including the establishment clause, which states that Congress may not pass any laws establishing a religion.”

“It is obvious to me that Judge Smith failed to recognize the truth of the United States Constitution and the historical background of our nation and Lehigh County,” said Gary Dull, executive director of the Pennsylvania Pastors Network (PPN, www.papastors.net), a state chapter of the American Pastors Network. “The First Amendment of the Constitution states that ‘Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…’ Having a cross in the center of the Lehigh County seal is not in any way ‘establishing’ a religion by county founders, leaders or citizens. Therefore, the opinion of Judge Smith is unconstitutional in that it both prohibits the free exercise of people of faith who historically were and are a part of the county and also fails to recognize the Judeo-Christian heritage upon which our nation, of which Lehigh County is a part, was founded.

“In his own statement, the judge said that ‘the court does not believe the current state of law applicable to this case comports with the text of the Establishment Clause,’ and so in the mind of any sensible person, that ends the argument,” added Dull, who is the senior pastor at Faith Baptist Church of Altoona in Blair County. “For the judge to then rule in favor of the plaintiffs is an act of twisting the wording of the First Amendment in an effort to make it say what it does not according to original intent. The citizens of Lehigh County, whether they are religious or not, must stand up for constitutional law if indeed the integrity of the court system is to remain in compliance with the law of the land. America is a nation of law based upon a Constitution that has lasted for nearly two and half centuries and is not based on the whims and opinions of individual citizens. The best thing any judge or citizen can do to maintain the strength of our country is to follow the law of the Constitution, interpret it accordingly and refuse to allow personal opinion, politics, philosophy, desire or pressure from those who oppose the basic principles of our nation to take away from what America has been about from the time of its founding.”

Judge Smith wrote in his ruling that “While the court does not believe the current state of the law applicable to this case comports with the text of the Establishment Clause, the court is not in a position to reject it. The law, as it currently stands, requires that the court rule in favor of the plaintiffs: the inclusion of the cross lacked a secular purpose both when the defendant adopted the seal and when the defendant refused to remove the cross from the seal, and a reasonable observer would perceive the seal as endorsing Christianity.”

Lehigh County will now have to redesign the seal, in use since 1944, which includes a Latin cross near the center, as well as a heart, bison, silos and other imagery. The seal appears on flags, buildings, letterhead and legal documents, as well as the county website.

AFT on the Passage of the House Budget Resolution

Source: American Federation of Teachers

Washington, D.C. - October 5, 2017 - (The Ponder News) -- American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten released the following statement on the passage of the House budget resolution:

“Republicans passed a budget resolution that decimates public education, Medicare and Medicaid to give tax breaks to the rich and corporations. This isn’t a budget; it’s a setup for a massive tax break for those at the top and will further rig our economy against working people while simultaneously hurting kids, seniors and the poor. Today’s budget action is more proof that President Trump and congressional Republicans continue to govern for the powerful at the expense of the vulnerable.

“The underlying tradeoff that runs through this budget—providing massive tax cuts to the wealthy while slashing programs that support the most vulnerable among us—reflects the absolutely wrong priority and puts key K-12 and higher education programs at risk. This is especially evident as we need to invest and rebuild after the recent hurricanes. It is no time to have to cut services to American citizens in Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Texas and Florida to provide a tax cut 80 percent of which will benefit the top 1 percent.

“The AFT will encourage tax reform that improves working people’s lives, makes the tax system fairer and ensures adequate revenues for vital government services.”

Opinion/Editorial: THE CALM BEFORE THE STORM

by Anthony J Codispoti

Here is what I have learned about President Trump. He knows the news media despises him. More than 90% of mainstream media news stories about the President and and his administration are negative. How could that possibly be considered fair coverage?

Of course, it isn't fair and there are no indications anywhere that it's about to change. One might get the sense that if President Trump walked on water and talked to Jesus, the headlines in the Washington Post and the NY Times would read, "Trump Conspires with Risen Christ; Women and Minorities Most Affected."

The question the media and all Americans should ask is this: does this president deserve 90% or more negative coverage from the news media? Personally, I always knew that the news media, which didn't have an adversarial bone in its body for eight years under Obama, would suddenly rediscover those bones under ANY Republican President. The fact that the Republican President is Donald Trump offends their elitist sensibilities very deeply indeed.

He knows he isn't going to get fair coverage and it's pointless to hope for it. But he cannot allow the media bias to discredit him or undermine his authority as President. This media today is more than adversarial. They are attempting a subversion of Presidential authority which will have repercussions for future Presidents if permitted. In reaction, President Trump is duty bound to act to protect the institution of the Presidency.

So, what can he do? Well, one thing he could do is discredit the mainstream news media. He does this in speeches all the time, but that's not nearly enough. Labeling them "fake news" plays only to his base of supporters, but it doesn't prove his point to anyone else.

He needs the media to discredit itself as well, preferably, by its own hand, because that will lend credibility to his argument outside of his base of support. It is here that the mainstream news media is actually building Trump's case against themselves. He is providing the rope and they are hanging themselves while Americans are watching.

Here is just one way the President is accomplishing this:

Trump knows the media expects all Presidents to behave a certain way. He knows behaving differently, which he finds easy to do, can cause the media to focus on idiosyncratic aspects of his personality to such distraction, they will appear petty and totally obsessed in the process.

It has gotten so bad, they will create firestorms in 2-3 day news cycles obsessing over Melania's choice of footwear, or the way Trump tosses paper towels to Puerto Rican hurricane victims, and even throw away lines intended to turn media attention down another blind alley, with two words "you'll see."

The Northeastern media elites complain that Trump has no appreciation for the necessary decorum expected from Presidents, but then are continually confounded when he behaves with that decorum as he did recently in Las Vegas.

The elites are outsmarting themselves because President Trump has a deep appreciation for the decorum required of the Presidency. And that's exactly why he breaks from that decorum often because he needs to keep an almost uniformly hostile media off balance and focused on trivia.

The fact of the matter is, President Trump owns the media and they know it and they know there is nothing they can do about it. They hate him for it.

They will never give him a fair shake. And he will never stop discrediting them and making them discredit themselves as long as they don't give him that fair shake.

There has never been a President like Trump. And we hear this from news media almost daily. But there also was never a President like Obama, either. Obama also broke with a great many Presidential traditions and limitations, but we never heard the wailing and gnashing of teeth with Obama's unprecedented behavior in office. It is necessary to point out here because it illustrates the bias in the news media. They were ideologically sympathetic with Obama. Any moves in service to that ideological agenda, even outside the Constitutional guardrails set for the Presidency were given few, if any critical words.

But President Trump's agenda is not ideological. It's populist. Populists bend to the popular will. The media is chock full of progressive ideologues wishing to impose their vision for America over the popular will. They are fundamentally undemocratic. They will seek as they have already sought to bring down this President. So far, it's hurt them more than it's hurt Trump.

The media behavior here is reminiscent of President Nixon's words as he left the White House upon resigning from office:

"Others may hate you, but those who hate you don't win, unless you hate them. And then, you destroy yourself." The media needs to review that one, I think.