• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Thomas More Law Center

The Sword and Shield for People of Faith

  • Home
  • Key Issues
    • Defending the Religious Freedom of Christians
    • Restoring Family Values
    • Defending the Sanctity of Human Life
    • Confronting the Threat of Radical Islam
    • Defending National Security
  • News
    • Press Releases
    • TMLC News Alerts
  • About
    • About the Thomas More Law Center
    • President & Chief Counsel
    • History of the Law Center
  • Contact
    • Contact
    • Request for Legal Help
  • Donate
    • Become a TMLC Member
    • Other Ways to Give
      • Planned Giving
    • Financial Transparency Information

Press Release

New Jersey Middle School Instructs Students Islam Is the “True Faith” – Thomas More Law Center Files Federal Lawsuit (Must see video)

January 24, 2018 by TMLC

January 24, 2018

     ANN ARBOR, MI -The Thomas More Law Center (“TMLC”), a national nonprofit public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, filed a federal lawsuit yesterday evening in the New Jersey District Court against several officials and teachers of the Chatham Middle School and the School District of the Chathams, located in New Jersey.

     The lawsuit, claiming several violations of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, was filed on behalf of Libby Hilsenrath and her minor son. Seventh-grade students at Chatham Middle School were forced to endure Islamic propaganda and an explicit call to convert to Islam through a disturbing set of videos in their World Cultures and Geography class.

     TMLC’s affiliated New Jersey attorney, Michael Hrycak, filed the lawsuit. TMLC staff attorney, Kate Oliveri, the principle drafter of the federal complaint, observed: “The Board of Education and other Defendants are waging a war against the religious protections afforded by the First Amendment. They attack religious liberty by enticing young school children with a direct call to convert to Islam and providing a step-by-step guide on how to effect that conversion.”

     One of the videos, linked in this press release, seeks to convert students to Islam and is filled with the Islamic religious beliefs presented as facts, as well as pure Islamic propaganda.  This five-minute video ends with the prayer “May God help us all find the true faith, Islam. Ameen.”  

     This video includes the following phrases as facts:

  • “Allah is the one God who created the heavens and the earth, who has no equal and is all powerful.”
  • “Muhammad (Peace be upon him) is the last & final Messenger of God. God gave him the Noble Quran.”
  • “Lo, We have sent thee (O Muhammad) with the truth, a bringer of glad tidings and a warner.”
  • “What is the Noble Quran? Divine Revelation sent to Muhammad (S) last Prophet of Allah. A Perfect guide for Humanity.”
  • “The Noble Quran: Guidance, Mercy and Blessing for all Mankind.”
  • “The Noble Quran: Without any doubt and an eloquent guide from Allah.”
  • “The Beautiful Quran: Guidance for the wise & sensible.”
  • “Islam: A shining beacon against the darkness of repression, segregation, intolerance and racism . . .”

     This propaganda video also contains excerpts from the Quran stating that Islam is “perfected” religion and the only religion for mankind. And it ends with a call to conversion: “May God help us all find the true faith, Islam.”

     However, just as shocking is the background music which includes the poem “Qaseedah Burdah” in Arabic, describing Christians and Jews as “infidels” and praising Muhammad in gruesome detail for slaughtering them:

  • “He [Muhammad] kept on encountering with them (infidels) in every battle until they looked like meat put on butcher’s bench (they were the lesson for those who were willing to encounter with the Muslims)” (parenthetical in original).
  • “It is as though the religion of Islam was a guest that visited every house of those (infidels and was) extremely desirous for the flesh of enemy. . .” (parenthetical in original).
  • “(The Muslims made their) white shining swords red (with the blood of infidels) after they were plunged; (and the majority of) enemies were having black hair (i.e., most of them were young).” (parenthetical in original).

      See 5-minute video here

     Seventh-grade students were also instructed to view a subtle propaganda cartoon video, 5 Pillars, which included bright, multi-colored words quoting the Islamic conversion creed: “There is no god except Allah and Prophet Muhammad is His messenger.” The video concludes with text containing contact information for the students of Chatham Middle School to set up their own mosque tour.

     Clearly, seventh graders were given a sugarcoated, false depiction of Islam. They were not informed of the kidnappings, beheadings, slave-trading, massacres, and persecution of non-Muslims, nor of the repression of women — all done in the name of Islam.

     Richard Thompson, TMLC President and Chief Counsel remarked, “What would people say if our public schools taught Christianity as the true faith? After watching this video, I can’t imagine any reasonable person saying this is not Islamic indoctrination. Chatham Middle School made a mockery of the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause.”

     Continued Thompson, “When Libby Hilsenrath brought her concerns to the school board’s attention, on February 6, 2017, they were disregarded. And when she appeared on the Tucker Carlson Show on February 20, 2017 to express her concerns to the Nation, the school community pilloried her. Clueless school administrators across our Nation are allowing this type of indoctrination to take place, and it’s up to vigilant and courageous parents like Libby Hilsenrath to stop it.”

      Because of Libby Hilsenrath’s attempts to get the Board of Education to remove the videos and end the Islamic indoctrination of her son and the other seventh-grade students, she was subjected to a barrage of personal attacks from her own community: “hateful,” “ignorant,” “intolerant,” “racist,” “closed minded,” and the list goes on. These attacks significantly intensified after she appeared on the Tucker Carlson Show.

     Click here to read the entire Federal Complaint

     The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Judeo-Christian heritage and moral values.  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

Thomas More Law Center Prevails In Fight To Have Town’s Settlement With Mosque Returned To State Court

November 30, 2017 by TMLC

November 30, 2017

     ANN ARBOR, MI – Agreeing with the position advocated by the Thomas More Law Center (“TMLC”), Federal District Court Judge Michael A. Shipp granted its motion to return to state court a challenge to legal settlements made earlier this year by Bernards Township, New Jersey, concerning construction of a mosque in a residential neighborhood.

     TMLC President and Chief Counsel Richard Thompson remarked, “This is an important procedural victory for the residents of Bernards Township. Since May, the Township has been trying to paper-over the fact that it held a sham hearing in violation of New Jersey law. Now the New Jersey courts will have the opportunity to address and remedy the Township’s violations of state law.”

     In March 2016, the Islamic Society of Basking Ridge sued Bernards Township alleging it had discriminated against the Islamic Society when it declined to approve construction of a large mosque on a lot that was far too small to handle the contemplated structure. A few months later, the U. S. Department of Justice, which was then under the leadership of Obama-appointed Attorney General Loretta Lynch, filed a second lawsuit against the Township.

     Violating New Jersey law, the Township Committee of Bernards Township and its Planning Board held a public meeting on May 23, 2017, in which they voted to settle the two lawsuits.  Even though these settlement agreements were matters of extraordinary public interest because they required the payment of $3.25 million dollars to a local mosque and its attorneys as well as the grant of a variance in the zoning ordinances to allow the mosque to be built, the public was not informed of the terms of the settlements nor allowed to comment on the vote until after it had been taken.

     On May 25, 2017, TMLC affiliated Westfield, New Jersey attorney, Michael Hrycak, filed a lawsuit in New Jersey Superior Court on behalf of Township resident Cody Smith for the Township’s open and flagrant violations of the New Jersey Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA).  The lawsuit alleges that the Township entered into the settlements with the mosque proponents without publicly disclosing their terms beforehand, as required by the OPMA.

     Though it was aware this lawsuit had been filed to void the settlement, on May 30, 2017, the Township nonetheless asked Judge Shipp to enter an order based on the settlement agreements without telling him about the litigation in state court. On June 13, 2017, after apparently realizing that the earlier votes without public notice were invalid, the Township held a second vote, supposedly to ratify the earlier vote. Then, on June 21, 2017, the Township removed the state challenge under the OPMA to Judge Shipps’ Court.

     TMLC contested the legitimacy of the Township’s actions in removing the case to Judge Shipps’ court and asked him to return the case to state court, where it belonged. The Township vigorously opposed TMLC’s request. Yesterday, however, Judge Shipp rejected the Township’s objections and agreed with TMLC that the matter should be heard in state, rather than federal court.

     The complaint asks the Superior Court to declare the Township’s votes to be invalid and uphold the right of its residents to have transparency in their local government.

Read the Judge’s Order Remanding the Case Here.

Thomas More Law Center Files Federal Lawsuit to Stop City’s Silencing of Pro-Life Prayer and Counseling

November 20, 2017 by TMLC

  November 20, 2017   

     ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, MI, on Friday (11/17/17), filed a federal lawsuit against the City of Charlotte, North Carolina, the mayor, and several city employees to stop the City’s unconstitutional censorship, intimidation, and harassment of peaceful pro-life advocates. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Cities4Life, a Christian pro-life ministry, and its Executive Director, Daniel Parks, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina. 

     For over a decade, Cities4Life volunteers have peacefully assembled outside of Charlotte’s busiest abortion facility to pray and provide faith-based pro-life counseling for mothers seeking an abortion. However, responding to pressure from pro-abortion groups, the City of Charlotte has recently acted to silence this pro-life message by using an ordinance that unconstitutionally discriminates against signs based upon their content. In July of this year, City officials began enforcing the ordinance in a discriminatory manner so as to target the activities of pro-life religious groups, but not those of pro-abortion organizations.

     Since July, Daniel Parks has been issued at least 4 citations by the City alleging a violation of the ordinance. 

     Tyler Brooks, the TMLC attorney handling the case, commented: “The City of Charlotte and its code enforcement officials have used the City Code to violate the First Amendment by restricting Cities4Life’s use of signs, and therefore its speech, because they object to the content of those signs. Thus, despite their desire to exercise their constitutional rights and speak freely, Cities4Life and its volunteers have encountered unconstitutional censorship.” 

     Cities4Life, headquartered in Concord, North Carolina, has chapters in Nashville, Tennessee; Tampa Bay, Florida; and Lexington, Kentucky as well as other parts of the country. David Benham, of Benham Brothers fame, is Founder and Chairman of the Board of Cities4Life. Cities4Life’s approach is peaceful, prayerful, and non-violent as it seeks to demonstrate the love of Jesus Christ, clearly seen in this video (5 minutes).

     Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, commented: “This is the second pro-life lawsuit we’ve filed in the past month.  Despite the many pro-life victories in recent years, pro-abortion forces, which control the government in many large cities, have waged a guerrilla war against courageous pro-life advocates, like Cities4Life, who are engaged on the front lines of the battle. Cities like Charlotte are using their law enforcement powers to silence the voice of these pro-life warriors.”

     The complaint asks the federal court to declare the City’s ordinance unconstitutional and to permanently enjoin its enforcement. 

Read TMLCs Complaint Here

Thomas More Law Center Asks Supreme Court to Prevent Maine’s Persecution of Pro-Life Pastor

November 8, 2017 by TMLC

November 8, 2017

     ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center (“TMLC”), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday (11/06/17) to review a U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit’s decision that allows government officials to use a noise provision to prevent peaceful sidewalk counseling in front of abortion facilities. The petition for review is the latest step in TMLC’s legal battle to prevent the State of Maine from silencing peaceful, pro-life sidewalk counselors.

     Kate Oliveri, the TMLC attorney who drafted the petition, commented: “The First Circuit’s dangerous opinion would allow all levels of government to restrict any speaker with whom they disagree by creative legislation that targets the reason the speaker engages in speech rather than the actual words spoken. This, however, is a distinction without difference that affords governments the right to silence all speech they find disagreeable.”

     In 2015, TMLC filed a lawsuit on behalf of Pastor Andrew March against the Maine Attorney General and several police officers challenging the constitutionality of a noise provision in the Maine Civil Rights Act (“MCRA”). That provision prohibits noise outside healthcare buildings made with the intent to interfere with health services. Under Maine law, the term “health services” includes abortions.

     Accordingly, this seemingly innocuous statute gives law enforcement officials the power to stop pro-life counselors from speaking on the public sidewalk in front of abortion facilities because they equate an intent to discourage a woman from having an abortion as an intent to interfere with a medical procedure.

     The federal district court agreed with TMLC’s legal position and barred the State from using the noise provision because it was a content-based restriction on speech in violation of the First Amendment. However, the Maine Attorney General appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, which reversed the lower court and created the false dichotomy that the content of speech can somehow be separated from the purpose of the speaker.

Click here to read TMLC’s entire petition asking for Supreme Court review.

     TMLC’s lawsuit on behalf of Pastor March is the third case in three years in which the Law Center has defended pro-life speakers on the public sidewalks of Portland, Maine.  The first federal case, which was filed in 2014 on behalf of several sidewalk counselors, successfully challenged the constitutionality of Portland’s ordinance that established a 39-foot buffer zone around abortion facilities.

     However, only two weeks after conceding that the buffer zone was unconstitutional, the Maine Attorney General filed a state lawsuit against Pastor Brian Ingalls under the noise provision of MCRA. TMLC is still defending Pastor Ingalls in the ongoing litigation.

     The third case occurred less than a month after charges were filed against Pastor Ingalls. Police, citing the same noise provision in MCRA, issued an official warning to Pastor March, who had taken up Pastor Ingalls’ mantle preaching outside the abortion facility. TMLC filed the federal lawsuit that the petition asks the Supreme Court to review.

     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.

 

Duke University Sued By Thomas More Law Center Over Religious Discrimination Against Pro-Life Nurse

October 30, 2017 by TMLC

October 30, 2017

     ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center (“TMLC”), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, filed a federal lawsuit last Friday on behalf of Sara T. Pedro, a Catholic nurse in the Emergency Department of Duke University Hospital, who was discriminated and retaliated against after her employer learned of her pro-life religious beliefs.  Named as defendants in the lawsuit are both Duke University and Duke University Health System, Inc. (“Duke”). 

     Tyler Brooks, the TMLC attorney handling the case, commented: “This case illustrates the unfortunate dangers faced today by individuals who seek to remain faithful to their religious beliefs in the workplace.”

     “With this lawsuit, however, we intend to show that even very large employers must respect the civil rights of their Christian employees,” said Mr. Brooks. 

     The complaint, which was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, describes how Ms. Pedro compiled an unblemished record during her eight years of work as a nurse prior to being hired by Duke.   

     During a classroom orientation, a group of newly-hired nurses that included Ms. Pedro was told by a nursing supervisor that Duke categorically refuses to grant religious accommodations for Emergency Department employees who object to assisting in abortions. Learning about Duke’s pro-abortion policy for the first time, Ms. Pedro made written requests for religious accommodation because of her opposition to abortion. Her requests motivated acts of discrimination and retaliation by Duke in violation of federal and state laws.

     Duke’s policy and actions violate several federal and state laws, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Fair Labor Standards Act, North Carolina’s Wage and Hour Act, and North Carolina common law.  

     The federal lawsuit details several specific acts of retaliation as a result of Ms. Pedro’s requests for religious accommodation. For example, Duke refused to advance Ms. Pedro from training status to regular duty, issued her a written warning for vague and unsubstantiated reasons, and then placed her on administrative leave when she attempted to formally dispute the warning. 

     To this day, nearly a year after it was first made, Duke has not issued a final decision on Ms. Pedro’s request to be excused from assisting in abortions.  In her complaint, Ms. Pedro alleges that Duke sought to force her out of her job rather than accommodate her religious beliefs as required by Title VII. 

     The first two paragraphs of TMLC’s complaint describe the essence of the lawsuit:

     “At its heart, this case presents a simple yet important question: Must a devout Catholic abandon fundamental tenets of her faith if she wishes to be employed as a nurse at Duke University Hospital?  Despite the fact that Defendant Duke has answered ‘yes’ to this question, federal and state civil rights laws say otherwise. Therefore, Plaintiff Sara Theresa Pedro brings this action to vindicate her rights under the law.

     An employee does not forfeit her right to practice her religion and abide by the tenets of her faith when she enters the workplace.”

Read TMLCs entire Federal Complaint here.

     The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Judeo-Christian heritage and moral values.  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.

Thomas More Law Center Asks the U. S. Supreme Court to Review the Unjust Destruction of a Decorated Combat Commander’s Career

September 14, 2017 by TMLC

     September 14, 2017

     ANN ARBOR, MI—On Monday, September 11, 2017, the Thomas More Law Center (“TMLC”), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari asking the United States Supreme Court to correct the injustice done to Lieutenant Colonel (“LTC”) Christopher Downey after the United States Army violated its own regulations, effectively ending his stellar career.Decorated Combat Commander Learns the Hard Way: Military Rules Don’t Apply to Lesbian Officers; Thomas More Law Center Files Federal Lawsuit

     In a footnote, the U. S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals acknowledged that the Army applied the incorrect burden of proof to LTC Downey’s case, contrary to its own regulations.  However, it shrugged off this fundamental error. LTC Downey’s petition to the Supreme Court points out that the error was so manifest and so serious that nearly every other appellate court in the land would have required the Army’s final review board to rehear his case. 

     TMLC attorney, Jay Combs, the principle author of the Petition to the Supreme Court, commented: “The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals threw away the exceptional career of Lieutenant Colonel Downey in a footnote.  The issue that the Fourth Circuit so cavalierly disposed of in a footnote was so serious that nearly every other circuit in the United States, on this issue alone, would have reversed the entire Army Board process without the need to even address any of the other issues in the case.  Most circuits recognize that the rule of law is dealt a crippling blow if an agency does not have to follow its own regulations.”

     Combs was assisted by attorney Erin Kuenzig, who had handled the District Court and Fourth Circuit arguments.  

     LTC Downey’s troubles began in 2012 when he made the “politically incorrect” effort to prevent two lesbian female officers under his command from violating Army regulations regarding public displays of affection. The two officers, a Captain and a Lieutenant, were in uniform at a formal military ball and were on the dance floor engaged in prolonged French kissing, publicly taking off each other’s uniform jackets, and other intimate and salacious conduct.  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 unit as well as the offending officers. In the process of lowering the camera of an enlisted soldier, the camera accidentally made contact with the soldier’s nose. As a result, despite the recommendations of LTC Downey’s immediate superior, General Mark Milley ordered an investigation and a subsequent Article 15 hearing where he acted as the presiding officer on charges of assault consummated by battery and violation of the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy.  

     The Article 15 proceeding, which lasted approximately 5 hours, was more concerned about offending homosexual advocacy groups than the guilt or innocence of LTC Downey. General Milley found LTC Downey guilty of the charge of assault consummated by battery. LTC Downey was issued reprimands for both violations, relieved of command, issued a negative Officer Evaluation Report, and removed from the attendance list of the National War College.

     A formal board hearing was convened to review the same matters to decide whether LTC Downey should be retained in the Army. The formal board, unlike General Milley in the Article 15 proceedings, conducted an exhaustive adversarial hearing in which the Army was represented by an attorney and LTC Downey was also represented by counsel.  The hearing board listened to the testimony of multiple witnesses, reviewed evidence, and listened to the arguments of government and defense attorneys. Afterwards, the formal board unanimously determined the allegations against LTC Downey were not supported by even a preponderance of the evidence. 

     Despite the unanimous decision of the formal board of officers, the prior contrary findings of the Article 15 hearing remained a part of LTC Downey’s official record, destroying the further progression of his stellar career and tarnishing his good name.

     Downey was well on his way to becoming a high-ranking officer in the Army, as evidenced by the glowing remarks from his commanding officers. In early April of 2012, Downey received a prestigious award recognizing him and the unit that he commanded as the best aviation battalion in the United States Army. 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.”

     His performance reviews uniformly painted a picture of one of the Army’s most skilled and accomplished combat aviators.

     Former Secretary of the Army, Louis Caldera, wrote of Downey:

     “As former SecArmy I had the honor of working with strong officers daily, Chris Downey stands out among them. A clearly superior performance by a leader with phenomenal potential.”

     White House Military Office Operations Director, Marcy Steinke-Fike:

     “He is clearly in the top 1% of the handpicked officers of the White House Military Office Operations Directorate and in all of the Lieutenant Colonel’s I have known in my 20 years of military service. Chris planned the most sensitive and complex missions in support of the President, Vice President, First Lady and other White House delegations. Absolutely unlimited potential – a future General Officer!”

     Commanding General John F. Campbell:

     “Lieutenant Colonel Chris Downey’s performance in combat has been spectacular, he is my best aviation task force commander among the top three out of 70+ commanders that I senior rate. Strong General Officer potential.”  

     The Administrative Board Applied the Wrong Burden Of Proof

     In order to remedy the injustice caused by the erroneous Article 15, LTC Downey appealed to the Army Board for the Correction of Military Records (“ABCMR”). Unfortunately for LTC Downey, the ABCMR applied the wrong burden of proof to his case. The Board is governed by 32 C.F.R. § 581.3(e)(2) which provides: “Burden of proof. The ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence.” (emphasis added). Rather than holding LTC Downey to the correct burden of proof, the Board held him to the much more difficult burden of proving an error or injustice by clear and convincing evidence.  Finding that LTC Downey had not met this illegitimately high standard, the Board denied him relief. 

     Richard Thompson, President and chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center commenting on what happened to LTC Downey, stated: “There is no question in my mind that Lieutenant Colonel Downey was a victim of the military’s efforts to appease homosexual advocacy groups. As a result of political correctness gone amuck, America lost an outstanding combat commander who had given his country over 24 years of loyal service.”

Click here to read the Petition

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.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 4
  • Page 5
  • Page 6
  • Page 7
  • Page 8
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 15
  • Go to Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

  • The President’s Blog
  • TMLC in the News
  • Request for Legal Help
  • Leave a Legacy
  • Sign up as Pro Bono Attorney

Get Email Updates

STAY CONNECTED
  • Become a Fan
  • Follow Us
  • Video Library
  • RSS Feed

  • Home
  • Key Issues
  • News
  • About
  • Contact
  • Donate
© 2024 - Thomas More Law Center • 24 Frank Lloyd Wright Drive • Suite J 3200 • Ann Arbor, MI 48106 • Office: 734.827.2001 • Fax: 734.930.7160