ACLU Civil Liberties Union of Delaware
Defending Individual Rights and Personal Freedom
Religion & Belief
January 2009
The Good Shepherd Church, an Episcopal church, has been using the William B. Keene Elementary School for Sunday services for some time now. In August 2008, the Delaware Association for Humanism wrote to Dr. Lillian M. Lowery, Superintendent of the Christina School District, asserting that “church services in public schools are in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.” The Association also asserted that the Church’s use of Keene violated the District’s own policy. Based on that letter, the District asked the Church to cease its use of the school by the end of October.
As a general rule, public buildings must be made available to religious groups on the same basis that they are made available to the general public. Because the District permits a wide variety of other groups to use its facilities, we contacted the District on the Church’s behalf. In January 2009, we reached an amicable resolution with the District, whereby the Church will be permitted to continue using the facilities on the same terms as it has been using them all along.
Jorgina Dennis –accommodation for religious headcovering
In April 2008, Ms. R., a nurse who had been hired to provide medical care at the New Castle County Detention Center (“NCCDC”) was informed that she could not wear her khimar, or religious headcovering, at work. Ms. R. is Muslim, and as part of her religious faith and practice, wears a headscarf when she is in public and when she is at home, if she is in the presence of men who are not part of her immediate family. Ms. R. has studied religious texts, thought deeply, and prayed about her practice of covering her head and hair. To Ms. R., wearing a headscarf is a reminder of her faith, of the importance of modesty in her religion, and of her religious obligations, as well as a symbol of her own control over who may see the more intimate parts of her body.
Ms. R. requested a reasonable accommodation for her khimar, but was denied. We contacted Ms. R.’s employer and NCCDC to advocate on her behalf, and in May 2009, Ms. R. was informed that she would be provided the reasonable accommodation that she had requested.
Boscov’s v. Jackson: ACLU Wins Religious Discrimination Case on Behalf of Wiccans
On February 15, 2007, the Superior Court for Kent County ruled in our favor in a discrimination suit against Boscov’s Department Store on behalf of a group of Wiccans, pagans, and born-again Christians (“Complainants”). Our clients had previously represented themselves before the Human Relations Commission and won a judgment against the department store in the amount of $21,000, as well as a civil penalty against Boscov’s of $5,000. Boscov’s appealed to the Superior Court and we represented the Complainants on appeal.
Sometime in 2005, a representative from Boscov’s Department Store in Dover approached Donna Jackson, a local psychic, to ask if she could arrange for a group of instructors to teach community education classes for their Summer 2005 “Campus of Courses,” to be held at the Boscov’s auditorium. Donna, who had taught at the Campus of Courses before without incident, arranged for herself and the other Complainants to teach several courses, including classes on Meditation; Intro to Tarot; Intro to Numerology; Creative Talismans; Herbal Healing; Witch Balls; and How to Make Charms for Protection. All of these classes were listed in the Course Catalogue under the heading of “Spiritual Awareness,” but the content of the courses was not religious in nature. Boscov’s also scheduled other classes to be taught during that term, including a calligraphy class and two photography classes.
After receiving several complaints from Fundamentalist Christians about the nature of the courses, Boscov’s decided to cancel only those courses taught by the Wiccans, but allowed the other three courses – taught by non-Wiccans – to proceed.
Elizabeth Tucker, Mike Cochran, and Tyler O’Connell, from the law firm of Richards Layton & Finger, were the Cooperating Attorneys in this case.
Jane Doe v. Cape Henlopen School District: Anti-Muslim Teachings in a Public School
Jane Doe’s children became the targets of anti-Muslim teachings, discrimination, and harassment in their school by teachers, administrators, and fellow students. Mrs. Doe and her children seek, among other things, declaratory and injunctive relief directing the defendants to cease engaging in such unconstitutional and unlawful acts; to develop policy procedures end such acts and to foster a peaceful and tolerant learning environment; and to implement mandatory training programs for faculty and staff on issues of religious and cultural diversity.
Gary Aber is the Cooperating Attorney in this case.