Press Release

Thomas More Law Center Files U.S. Supreme Court Brief: “Marriage Should Be Reinforced, Not Redefined”

December 22, 2014 by TMLC

ANN ARBOR, MI – Asserting that marriage should be reinforced, not redefined, the Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national, nonprofit public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, MI filed its fourth amicus brief (friend of the court brief) in the U.S. Supreme Court supporting traditional marriage this past Friday (December 19th). The amicus brief, which was filed on behalf of the National Coalition of Black Pastors and Christian Leaders (Coalition), supported the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeal’s decision in the case of Deboer v. Snyder, which upheld Michigan’s constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman as constitutional.

The Sixth Circuit Court’s decision in DeBoer examined the laws defining marriage as exclusively the union of one man and one woman in Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee, ruling all four passed constitutional review.

This latest TMLC brief is part of an effort to stem the onslaught of federal cases overturning the definition of traditional marriage which were passed by overwhelming majorities of voters. TMLC formed a legal team consisting of TMLC’s senior trial counsel, Erin Mersino, and Co-counsels William R. Wagner and John S. Kane of Lansing, MI. TMLC has been filing briefs on behalf of the Coalition in significant cases dealing with traditional marriage. One of the purposes of these briefs is to negate the homosexual community’s fallacious argument that discrimination because of one’s sexual preference is the same as racial discrimination.

TMLC’s brief pointed out that, “There is no surer way to destroy an institution like marriage than to destroy its meaning. If ‘marriage’ means whatever a political activist, a cherry-picked plaintiff, or an appointed judge wants it to mean, it means nothing. If it has no fixed meaning, it is merely a vessel for a judge’s will. It is a subterfuge for judicial legislation.”

TMLC’s brief went on to observe, “The voters of Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio, and Tennessee, by an overwhelming majority, affirmed a truth upon which our nation was founded and has flourished for over two hundred years: that the natural family is the optimal environment in which children should be raised. Human history, scientific observations of human biology, and our own experience, common sense and reason tell us that children naturally come exclusively from opposite sex unions, and children benefit from being raised by their biological parents whenever possible.”

In conclusion, TMLC’s brief asked the Supreme Court to grant the request for a review and uphold the Sixth Circuit’s opinion that correctly abstained from redefining the State-approved meaning of marriage, or in the alternative deny the petition for review to allow the Sixth Circuit’s well-reasoned decision to stand.

Click here to read TMLC’s entire brief

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Judeo-Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life. It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America. The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization. You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org.

Army Ranger Chaplain Punished for Being Christian—Thomas More Law Center Responds

December 19, 2014 by TMLC

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a member of the Restore Military Religious Freedom Coalition (Coalition), was signatory to a letter addressed to Secretary of the Army, John McHugh. This letter, made public earlier this week (December 17^th) defends the actions of Captain (CPT) Joseph Lawhorn, a Chaplain with the 5^th Ranger Training Battalion. Chaplain Lawhorn, was issued a Letter of Concern because he referenced scripture while presenting a mandatory suicide awareness and prevention briefing in which he described his own personal struggles with depression.

CPT Lawhorn earned his Ranger tab in 1999, was deployed to Afghanistan in 2011, and has served as the Chaplain for 5^th Ranger Training Battalion since December 2012.

An alarming aspect of this case is the fact that Chaplain Lawhorn’s superior, Colonel David G. Fivecoat, issued the Letter of Concern on his own initiative based on an article in the Huffington Post. No soldier attending Chaplain Lawhorn’s presentation made a formal complaint, nor was the Chaplain ever given the opportunity to defend his actions before the Letter of Concern was issued.

The Coalition’s letter requests that the Letter of Concern be withdrawn as Colonel Fivecoat “misjudged the law and disciplined Chaplain Lawhorn without justification.” Chaplain Lawhorn, a senior captain who is eligible for promotion to major, could be negatively affected by the Letter of Concern.

The Restore Military Religious Freedom Coalition was formed to defend the religious rights of members of our Armed Forces after a number of events occurred within the US Armed Forces that raised significant concerns about the status of the religious liberties so greatly prized by all Americans.

Court Upholds Public School’s Ban of American Flag; TMLC asks Supreme Court for Review

December 18, 2014 by TMLC

ANN ARBOR, MI – On Monday (December 15, 2014), the Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, MI, along with two other entities, asked the US Supreme Court to review the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision which upheld a California public school’s ban on the display of the American flag because it feared the flag might incite Mexican students to violence. In his minority dissent, Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain criticized the decision as permitting “the will of the mob to rule our schools.”

On May 5, 2010, Assistant Principal Miguel Rodriguez of Live Oak High School in Morgan Hill, California ordered several students wearing t-shirts emblazoned with the American flag to turn them inside out or leave school. Rodriguez claims he acted out of concern that Mexican students would react violently because the patriotic shirts were worn on the day the school was celebrating Cinco de Mayo, a Mexican holiday. Two of the students chose to leave rather than disrespect the American flag. Ironically, and to his credit and that of his parents, one of the students was of Mexican descent.

Richard Thompson, TMLC’s President and Chief Counsel, commented, “What happened in Live Oak High School is emblematic of what is happening in public schools across our nation – multiculturalism is trumping allegiance to America.”

As a result of Live Oak High School’s ban on the American flag while allowing displays of the Mexican flag, the Thomas More Law Center and California attorney Bill Becker filed a federal lawsuit against the school and school officials on behalf of three of the students in June 2010. A subsequent lower court decision in favor of the school was affirmed by a divided panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The sharply worded dissent written by Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain joined by Judges Tallman and Bea, stated: “It is a foundational tenet of the First Amendment law that the government cannot silence a speaker because of how an audience might react to the speech.” He goes on to write, “It is this bedrock principle—known as the heckler’s veto doctrine—that the panel overlooks, condoning the suppression of free speech by some students because other students might have reacted badly.”

The petition for review by the TMLC and two other firms draws on this criticism: “The question presented is whether the Ninth Circuit erred by allowing school officials to prevent students from engaging in a silent, passive expression of opinion by wearing American flag shirts because other students might react negatively to the pro-America message.”

The petition states, too, that “if the decision is permitted to stand, it will have a detrimental impact on all student speech by rewarding violence over civil discourse”.

Marine Dad Banned from School Property; Daughter Gets Failing Grade for Refusing Islamic Indoctrination – The Thomas More Law Center Steps In

November 20, 2014 by TMLC

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC) today announced its representation of John Kevin Wood, and his wife Melissa, in their battle with La Plata High School in Maryland over the Islamic indoctrination of their 11^th grade daughter in her World History class. Their daughter was required to complete assignments where she had to affirm that “There is no god but Allah” and the other Five Pillars of Islam.

The case gained national attention when the school banned John Wood from entering school property after he objected to the religion of Islam being taught in his daughter’s history class and demanded that she be given an alternative assignment. The school refused. Wood, a former Marine who served in Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm and lost friends in that action, saw firsthand the destruction caused in the name of Allah and that Islam is not “a religion of peace;” and he would not budge from his position.

The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC) is a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan. TMLC Senior Trial Counsel, Erin Mersino, and Maryland attorney, Michael F. Smith of The Smith Appellate Law Firm, represent the Wood family. Yesterday they filed a request for records relating to the case under Maryland’s Public Information Act.

On October 22, 2014, John Wood discovered that his daughter was being forced to repeat religious tenets of Islam as a part of her World History class assignment. She was required to write how the prophet Muhammad was visited by the Angel Gabriel and preached that there is only one true god, who is Allah. The assignment made her write that Mohammad is the messenger of Allah and that the Qur’an is holy text. The assignment required her to affirm that “Allah is the same god that is worshipped in Christianity and Judaism” and that the “Qur’an is the word of Allah revealed to Mohammad in the same way that Jews and Christians believe the Torah and the Gospels were revealed to Moses and the New Testament writers.” The assignment also forced young women such as the Woods’ daughter, to fill in the following sentences: “Men are the managers of the affairs of women” and “Righteous women are therefore obedient.”

When John Wood discovered the Islamic propaganda and indoctrination, he was rightfully outraged, and that evening unsuccessfully tried to contact the school by phone to voice his objections. Wood witnessed firsthand the destruction caused in the name of Allah and knows Islam is not “a religion of peace.” He served in Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm, and lost friends in that action. On 9-11, Wood responded as a firefighter to the smoldering Pentagon. He refused to allow La Plata High School to subject his daughter to Islamic indoctrination despite the threatened academic consequences.

The next day, October 23^rd, Wood had a phone conversation with a La Plata vice principal where he again reiterated his objections to his daughter being indoctrinated into the religion of Islam. The vice principal indicated that his daughter, a high school junior with college hopes, would receive zeros on her assignments on Islam if she did not complete them. He asked how the religion of Islam could be taught when schools are prohibited from teaching the religion of Christianity.

The following day, October 24^th, John Wood again spoke with the vice principal. She again refused to allow an alternative assignment.

Commenting on the case, Richard Thompson, TMLC’s President and Chief Counsel stated: “Adding insult to injury, in an arrogant and unnecessary display of power, La Plata’s principal issued a written “No Trespass” notice, which denied this former Marine who stood in harm’s way defending our country including the principal and her staff, any access to school grounds. The school’s actions not only dishonored John Wood’s service, but the service of all men and women in our Armed Forces who defended our nation from Islamic violence. True to his Marine training, John Wood stood his ground. He did not retreat. Yes, his daughter has received a failing grade in her World History Class. But the story is not yet over.”

Decorated Combat Commander Learns the Hard Way: Military Rules Don’t Apply to Lesbian Officers; Thomas More Law Center Files Federal Lawsuit

November 13, 2014 by TMLC

The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, late yesterday (Nov. 12th) filed a federal lawsuit in the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia against the Secretary of the Army on behalf of highly decorated active duty Army Officer Lieutenant Colonel (LTC) Christopher Downey.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the TMLC commenting on the lawsuit, stated: “General George Patton who once wrote about the requirement of ‘loyalty from the bottom to the top,’ stated ‘loyalty from the top down is even more necessary.’ LTC Downey gave his all to the Army and to the country he loves, yet the Army he so loyally served threw him under the bus merely to avoid negative press from the homosexual community. America is set to lose one of its exceptional combat leaders due to an unjust application of the Army’s policy regarding repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell [“DADT”]. Our lawsuit is an attempt to correct this injustice to Chris Downey and our nation.”The lawsuit stems from LTC Downey’s effort to prevent two female officers under his command, a Captain and a Lieutenant, who were in uniform at a formal military ball and were on the dance floor engaged in prolonged French kissing, taking off each other’s uniform jackets, and other intimate conduct, from violating Army regulations regarding public display of affection. Once he became aware of the situation, LTC Downey took immediate action to stop the inappropriate behavior. He also attempted to prevent other soldiers from photographing and videotaping the officers’ inappropriate conduct, which he believed would embarrass the officers and affect the good order and discipline of his unit. In the process of lowering the camera of an enlisted soldier, the camera accidentally made contact with the soldier’s nose.As a result of the incident, LTC Downey was ordered to face an Article 15 hearing for assault consummated by battery and violation of the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. The commanding officer, General Mark Milley, found LTC Downey guilty of the charges. As a result, LTC Downey was issued reprimands for both violations, relieved of command, issued a negative Officer Evaluation Report (OER), and removed from the attendance list of the National War College.

The alleged victim of the assault never accused LTC Downey of assault. In fact, he stated that he was not the victim of an assault, and that he knew LTC Downey never intended to harm him. Moreover, the investigating officer appointed by General Milley found that LTC Downey did not intend to injure the soldier, but was motivated by the desire to protect the privacy of the two officers involved and the unit’s reputation. The investigator also found there was a positive command attitude and climate regarding repeal of “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.”

TMLC’s federal lawsuit alleges that the Article 15 proceedings against LTC Downey violated both the US Constitution and Army Regulations. LTC Downey has exhausted all of his military administrative appeals. He now turns to the federal courts as his last resort to vindicate his constitutional rights and to prevent the end of his military career.TMLC trial counsel Erin Kuenzig is one of the attorneys representing LTC Downey. Kuenzig explained, “A fair and impartial review of the facts leads to only one conclusion—that LTC Downey has always acted to protect the well-being of his soldiers, his unit, and his country and should never have been penalized for doing the right thing. We are asking the Court to review all of the due process violations and violations of Army regulations that led to such an unjust result in this case.”

AN OUTSTANDING MILITARY OFFICER

LTC Downey has given his country and the Army 24 years of distinguished service, including over 1,000 combat flight hours during three combat tours of duty. He has been awarded 3 Bronze Stars and 7 Air Medals, one with a “V” device for valor in combat. The Air Medal with “V” device was awarded for valor he displayed on May 25, 2011, in “complete disregard for his own safety while initiating multiple engagements against an enemy with superior fields of fire over friendly forces. His actions were decisive in saving the lives of soldiers on the ground.”

LTC Downey was selected ahead of officers from all three of the other major services to become the Presidential Airlift Coordinator for the White House in Washington, D.C. from 2008 to 2010. While serving at the White House, Downey’s direct supervisor described him as “clearly in the top 1% of the handpicked officers of the White House Military Office Operations Directorate and in all of the Lieutenant Colonels I have known in my 20 years of military service.”

From 2010 to 2012, LTC Downey returned to combat as an Aviation Task Force Squadron Commander in Jalalabad, Afghanistan. Under his direction, his unit exceeded Army maintenance standards enabling an unprecedented 3,000 missions executed and 30,000 flight hours flown in the most complex and dangerous region of Afghanistan, the Kunar Valley.Additionally, under his command, the unit won two national level awards in one year, an achievement repeated only once before in the history of the awards: The Ellis D. Parker Aviation Unit Award for the Top Combat Unit of the Year, which recognized that the unit operated in one of the most challenging and helicopter-dependent areas of operation while sustaining the finest safety record of any Aviation unit in theatre; and The Army Aviation Association of America Active Aviation Unit of the Year Award, which recognized that his unit flew in excess of 30,000 accident free hours in some of the most inhospitable flying terrain in the world. LTC Downey was rated as the best Aviation Task Force Commander in all of Regional Command East. He was slated to attend the National War College well before his peers.

THE ARTICLE 15 PROCEEDINGS

The Article 15 proceedings were unduly influenced by concern over adverse media attention, offending homosexual advocacy groups, and contradicting the Department of Defense’s position that repeal of DADT was being successfully implemented. Tainting the entire Article 15 proceedings was the fact that on May 10, 2012, two weeks before the Article 15 Hearing, a Department of Defense press statement entitled “Report Shows Success of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Repeal” trumpeted the conclusion that the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell repeal was being implemented successfully. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin E. Dempsey, claimed he had not seen “any negative effect on good order and discipline” resulting from the repeal.

The Article 15 Hearing took place in a conference room on May 30, 2012. LTC Downey appeared without his assigned military lawyer because she was told by General Milley’s lawyer that the hearing would merely be a “commanders’ conversation.” She advised Downey that her presence would make him “appear weak.” The hearing lasted 5 hours.

General Milley appeared at the hearing flanked by two of his staff lawyers who sat adjacent to him while LTC Downey sat alone in the middle of the room with no representation. LTC Downey was asked legal questions which he was not qualified to answer. He was also ordered to view a loose leaf binder of random photographs which had been taken throughout the night of the formal ball and characterize the behavior of the individuals depicted in the photos as “appropriate” or “inappropriate.”

Although the enlisted soldier LTC Downey was alleged to have assaulted was in the hall, he was not called as a witness. The two lesbian officers he allegedly discriminated against were not called. During the hearing, the General became angry that his investigation was being questioned and informed Downey he was keeping track of number of times Downey criticized his investigation.

As a consequence of the Article 15 determinations, a Show Cause Board was convened to determine whether LTC Downey should be retained in the Army. After hearing from multiple witnesses, the Board found that the allegations of LTC Downey’s derogatory activity was not supported by a preponderance of the evidence and voted unanimously to retain LTC Downey in the Army. Nevertheless, despite the Show Cause Board’s determination, his remarkable accomplishments and consistently stellar reviews from his superior officers, a Selective Early Retirement Board, which convened on Wednesday (Nov 12^th), will decide whether LTC Downey should be forced to retire.

Click here to read TMLC’s entire Complaint

Click here for downloadable version of TMLC’s complaint

Thomas More Law Center Files Brief Defending Traditional Marriage in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals

November 10, 2014 by TMLC

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a nonprofit public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, late Friday afternoon (Nov. 7), filed an amicus brief (friend of the court brief) in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals urging the Court to affirm a lower federal district court decision which upheld Louisiana’s traditional marriage law.

Louisiana’s marriage law affirms the definition of marriage as the union only between one man and one woman and was passed by 78% of the state’s voters. The Louisiana lawsuit filed by homosexual activists sought to use judicial power to overturn the will of the people. However, Louisiana Federal District Court Judge Martin C. Feldman ruled that Louisiana was under no constitutional obligation to recognize so-called “same-sex marriage,” and that its state law was “anchored to the democratic process.”

The plaintiffs appealed his ruling to the Fifth Circuit. In support of Judge Feldman’s decision, TMLC’s brief stated:

If “marriage” means whatever a political activist, a cherry-picked plaintiff, or an appointed judge wants it to mean, it means nothing. If it has no fixed meaning, it is merely a vessel for a judge’s will. It is used as a subterfuge for judicial legislation. And as Montesquieu observed: “There is no greater tyranny than that which is perpetrated under the shield of law and in the name of justice.”

As a part of its national strategy to defend traditional marriage, TMLC formed a team of lawyers to file friend of the court briefs (amicus briefs) on behalf of the National Coalition of Black Pastors and Christian leaders. The team consists of TMLC’s senior trial counsel, Erin Mersino, and Co-counsels William R. Wagner and John S. Kane of Lansing, Michigan. The team is tasked with filing briefs in significant cases dealing with the issue of traditional marriage.

The Law Center’s briefs reflect the view of a majority of African-Americans: that discrimination because of one’s sexual preference is not the same thing as racial discrimination and that tradition and morality should not be discarded as a basis of the law; as the pro-homosexual judges have done in their opinions.

TMLC’s brief is the fourth brief filed on behalf of the National Coalition of Black Pastors and Christian Leaders. It presents the unique perspective of African American religious leaders that discrimination because of one’s sexual preference is not the same thing as racial discrimination.

“Same-sex attracted individuals have never lawfully been forced to attend different schools, walk on separate public sidewalks, sit at the back of the bus, drink out of separate drinking fountains, denied their right to assemble, or denied their voting rights. The legal history of these disparate classifications, i.e., immutable racial discrimination and same-sex attraction, is incongruent. Yet, courts continue to mistakenly draw upon this incongruence as the basis for what they now deem “marriage equality.”

TMLC’s brief also countered same sex marriage arguments based on the 1967 case of Loving v. Virginia in which the US Supreme Court overturned Virginia’s laws prohibiting interracial marriages. The Supreme Court, in Loving v. Virginia, solely analyzed a state law that wrongfully condoned racial discrimination in the context of traditional marriage. The case did not address redefining marriage beyond the scope of the union between one man and one woman.

As a member of the Coalition, Bishop Samuel Smith of the Apostolic World Christian Fellowship consisting of 25, 000 churches worldwide representing over 5 million laity, avows: “Marriage was defined by God. Not by government. Government has no right to redefine marriage and destroy the meaning of family.”

SOME EXCERPTS FROM TMLC’S BRIEF (“Appellants” refers to Plaintiffs)

“The “marriage equality” slogan is self-defeating, because it is a standard-less standard that renders “marriage” equally meaningless for all. See id. at 269-75 (discussing that the logic of Plaintiffs’ position demands “equal marriage rights” for bigamists, polygamists, same-sex siblings, and virtually any other arrangement individuals might want to create).”

***

“If “marriage” means fulfilling one’s personal choices regarding intimacy, as the Appellants insist, it is difficult to see how States could regulate marriage on any basis. If personal autonomy is the essence of marriage, then not only gender, but also number, familial relationship, and even species are insupportable limits on that principle and they all will fall. This is not just a slippery slope on which the Appellants wish to set us, it is a bottomless pit into which they desire to throw us.”

***

“The Appellants wish to replace the morality of the Judeo-Christian tradition on which our country was founded with the trendy, relativist morality of political correctness.”

***

“As our tradition recognizes, some truths are self-evident. Among them are that men and women are different. In fact, it is clear from our very existence that men are made for women, and women for men. None of us would be here but for that truth. Another self-evident truth is that it is best for children to be raised by their parents whenever possible. There have been many theories to the contrary throughout history, but they have all proven vacuous at best. Public policy that recognizes and acts on these truths is not unfairly discriminatory. In fact, the only way to have sound public policy is to build on such truths.”

***

“Louisiana’s legislature and voters, with an overwhelming majority, affirmed a truth upon which our nation was founded and has flourished for over two hundred years: that the natural family is the optimal environment in which children should be raised. Human history, scientific observations of human biology, and our own experience, common sense and reason tell us that children come exclusively from opposite sex unions, and children benefit from being raised by their biological parents whenever possible.”

***

“Marriage should be reinforced, not redefined. This Court should uphold the District Court’s just ruling and reject the Appellants’ unconstitutional arguments, which undermine the family as the fundamental building block of our society by destroying the meaning of marriage.”

***

Click here to read TMLC’s entire Amicus Brief