• 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

Uncategorized

Florida Federal Judge Bans Enforcement of HHS Mandate Against Beckwith Electric, 1st in the State of Florida

June 27, 2013 by

news_img_3586ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, announced that this past Monday, Federal District Court Judge Elizabeth A. Kovachevich of the Middle District of Florida granted its Motion for a Preliminary Injunction banning enforcement of the HHS Mandate.  The motion for a Preliminary Injunction was filed by TMLC on behalf of Plaintiffs Thomas R. Beckwith and his family’s company, Beckwith Electric.

The Government claimed that once a business owner chooses to enter into the marketplace or incorporate his business, he surrenders his right to exercise his religious beliefs.

However, Judge Kovachevich’s 37-page decision which mentioned Thomas R. Beckwith’s unique family history—Beckwith’s ancestors arrived on the shores of America in 1626 to escape religious persecution from England — ended with a powerful statement on religious freedom:

 “The First Amendment, and its statutory corollary the RFRA, endow upon the citizens of the United States the unalienable right to exercise religion, and that right is not relinquished by efforts to engage in free enterprise under the corporate form. No legislative, executive, or judicial officer shall corrupt the Framers’ initial expression, through their enactment of laws, enforcement of those laws, or more importantly, their interpretation of those laws. And any action that debases, or cheapens, the intrinsic value of the tenet of religious tolerance that is entrenched in the Constitution cannot stand.” (Emphasis added)

Erin Mersino, TMLC’s lead attorney representing Beckwith, commented, “Tom Beckwith was fighting the Federal Government for the freedom to practice his Southern Baptist faith.  The HHS Mandate would have forced him to provide insurance coverage for abortion-inducing drugs in violation of his religious beliefs or face up to $6 million in annual penalties. Kovachevich’s ruling halts enforcement of the HHS mandate until a final decision is reached in this case.”

Click here to read Judge Kovachevich’s entire opinion.

Judge Kovachevich’s ruling is the first injunction against the HHS Mandate granted in the State of Florida.  It also marks the twenty-second injunction against the HHS Mandate granted by Federal Courts on religious freedom grounds across the country. The Government is expected to appeal the ruling to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

The Thomas More Law Center was assisted by local counsel Paul Pizzo and Scott Richards of the firm Fowler White Boggs, P.A. located in Tampa, Florida.

The Attorney General of the State of Florida filed a friend of the court brief in support of the Thomas More Law Center, as did several other Christian organizations, including the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention.

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Florida Federal Judge Bans Enforcement of HHS Mandate Against Beckwith Electric, 1st in the State of Florida

June 27, 2013 by

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, announced that this past Monday, Federal District Court Judge Elizabeth A. Kovachevich of the Middle District of Florida granted its Motion for a Preliminary Injunction banning enforcement of the HHS Mandate.  The motion for a Preliminary Injunction was filed by TMLC on behalf of Plaintiffs Thomas R. Beckwith and his family’s company, Beckwith Electric.

The Government claimed that once a business owner chooses to enter into the marketplace or incorporate his business, he surrenders his right to exercise his religious beliefs.

However, Judge Kovachevich’s 37-page decision which mentioned Thomas R. Beckwith’s unique family history—Beckwith’s ancestors arrived on the shores of America in 1626 to escape religious persecution from England — ended with a powerful statement on religious freedom:

 “The First Amendment, and its statutory corollary the RFRA, endow upon the citizens of the United States the unalienable right to exercise religion, and that right is not relinquished by efforts to engage in free enterprise under the corporate form. No legislative, executive, or judicial officer shall corrupt the Framers’ initial expression, through their enactment of laws, enforcement of those laws, or more importantly, their interpretation of those laws. And any action that debases, or cheapens, the intrinsic value of the tenet of religious tolerance that is entrenched in the Constitution cannot stand.” (Emphasis added)

Erin Mersino, TMLC’s lead attorney representing Beckwith, commented, “Tom Beckwith was fighting the Federal Government for the freedom to practice his Southern Baptist faith.  The HHS Mandate would have forced him to provide insurance coverage for abortion-inducing drugs in violation of his religious beliefs or face up to $6 million in annual penalties. Kovachevich’s ruling halts enforcement of the HHS mandate until a final decision is reached in this case.”

Click here to read Judge Kovachevich’s entire opinion.

Judge Kovachevich’s ruling is the first injunction against the HHS Mandate granted in the State of Florida.  It also marks the twenty-second injunction against the HHS Mandate granted by Federal Courts on religious freedom grounds across the country. The Government is expected to appeal the ruling to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

The Thomas More Law Center was assisted by local counsel Paul Pizzo and Scott Richards of the firm Fowler White Boggs, P.A. located in Tampa, Florida.

The Attorney General of the State of Florida filed a friend of the court brief in support of the Thomas More Law Center, as did several other Christian organizations, including the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention.

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.

Federal Judge: Teacher Who Punished Student for Expressing Catholic Belief Against Homosexuality Violated Student’s First Amendment Rights

June 20, 2013 by

news_img_3584ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, today announces a victory in their lawsuit against teacher Johnson McDowell of Howell High School in Howell, Michigan.  Federal District Judge Patrick J. Duggan of the Eastern District of Michigan issued his opinion yesterday.

The Court declared the teacher’s actions in punishing Daniel Glowacki for expressing his beliefs against homosexuality violated “Daniel’s First Amendment rights.”  In its findings of fact—the Court described how the teacher initiated a discussion about homosexuality.  The teacher wore a purple t-shirt and was promoting the homosexual agenda.  In response, the Plaintiff, 16 year-old Daniel Glowacki stated that homosexuality was against his Catholic beliefs.  The teacher, admittedly, became angry and threw Daniel out of class because he disagreed with Daniel’s beliefs.

The teacher in the lawsuit tried to blame Daniel and claimed he caused a disturbance in the teacher’s classroom.  The teacher’s claims were wholly unsupported by all of the other evidence in the case, including affidavits of students in the classroom and the teacher’s own earlier statements.  The teacher also tried to argue that Daniel’s religious statement was tantamount to “bullying.”  The Court dismissed that claim as well, holding that Daniel’s speech could not be silenced because the teacher did not like Daniel’s religious beliefs and viewpoint.

The Court’s opinion echoed the longstanding legal precedent that “students do not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”  Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Cmty. Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503, 506 (1969).

The teacher argued that Daniel’s speech that his religion did not approve of homosexuality was a bullying statement.  However, Judge Duggan, citing several cases, disagreed (citations and quotations omitted).

While the Court certainly recognizes that schools are empowered to regulate speech to prevent students from invading the rights of other students, people do not have a legal right to prevent criticism of their beliefs or for that matter their way of life.  Relatedly, a listeners’ reaction to speech is not a content-neutral basis for regulation.  While a student or perhaps several students may have been upset or offended by Daniel’s remarks, Tinker straight-forwardly tells us that, in order for school officials to justify prohibition of a particular expression of opinion, they must be able to show that this action was caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint. Simply put, the law does not establish a generalized hurt feelings defense to a high school’s violation of the First Amendment rights of its students.

Thomas More Law Center attorney, Erin Mersino was the lead counsel in the lawsuit.    It is expected that the teacher will appeal the decision.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, commenting on the favorable court decision, stated:

 “The purpose of our lawsuit was to protect students’ constitutional rights to free speech, defend religious liberty, and stop public schools from becoming indoctrination centers for the homosexual agenda.”

The Thomas More Law Center originally filed its federal lawsuit back on December 14, 2012 against the teacher, Johnson McDowell, and the Howell Public School District.  The claims against the School District were dismissed, and the Court held that the teacher alone was the responsible party.

The ACLU appeared in the case as amicus and supported Daniel’s position against the teacher.

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Federal Judge: Teacher Who Punished Student for Expressing Catholic Belief Against Homosexuality Violated Student’s First Amendment Rights

June 20, 2013 by

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, today announces a victory in their lawsuit against teacher Johnson McDowell of Howell High School in Howell, Michigan.  Federal District Judge Patrick J. Duggan of the Eastern District of Michigan issued his opinion yesterday.

The Court declared the teacher’s actions in punishing Daniel Glowacki for expressing his beliefs against homosexuality violated “Daniel’s First Amendment rights.”  In its findings of fact—the Court described how the teacher initiated a discussion about homosexuality.  The teacher wore a purple t-shirt and was promoting the homosexual agenda.  In response, the Plaintiff, 16 year-old Daniel Glowacki stated that homosexuality was against his Catholic beliefs.  The teacher, admittedly, became angry and threw Daniel out of class because he disagreed with Daniel’s beliefs.

The teacher in the lawsuit tried to blame Daniel and claimed he caused a disturbance in the teacher’s classroom.  The teacher’s claims were wholly unsupported by all of the other evidence in the case, including affidavits of students in the classroom and the teacher’s own earlier statements.  The teacher also tried to argue that Daniel’s religious statement was tantamount to “bullying.”  The Court dismissed that claim as well, holding that Daniel’s speech could not be silenced because the teacher did not like Daniel’s religious beliefs and viewpoint.

The Court’s opinion echoed the longstanding legal precedent that “students do not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”  Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Cmty. Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503, 506 (1969).

The teacher argued that Daniel’s speech that his religion did not approve of homosexuality was a bullying statement.  However, Judge Duggan, citing several cases, disagreed (citations and quotations omitted).

While the Court certainly recognizes that schools are empowered to regulate speech to prevent students from invading the rights of other students, people do not have a legal right to prevent criticism of their beliefs or for that matter their way of life.  Relatedly, a listeners’ reaction to speech is not a content-neutral basis for regulation.  While a student or perhaps several students may have been upset or offended by Daniel’s remarks, Tinker straight-forwardly tells us that, in order for school officials to justify prohibition of a particular expression of opinion, they must be able to show that this action was caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint. Simply put, the law does not establish a generalized hurt feelings defense to a high school’s violation of the First Amendment rights of its students.

Thomas More Law Center attorney, Erin Mersino was the lead counsel in the lawsuit.    It is expected that the teacher will appeal the decision.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, commenting on the favorable court decision, stated:

 “The purpose of our lawsuit was to protect students’ constitutional rights to free speech, defend religious liberty, and stop public schools from becoming indoctrination centers for the homosexual agenda.”

The Thomas More Law Center originally filed its federal lawsuit back on December 14, 2012 against the teacher, Johnson McDowell, and the Howell Public School District.  The claims against the School District were dismissed, and the Court held that the teacher alone was the responsible party.

The ACLU appeared in the case as amicus and supported Daniel’s position against the teacher.

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

A Memorial Day Tribute

May 25, 2013 by

Memorial Day is a time to remember the fallen heroes throughout our nation’s history “who gave the last full measure of devotion” to their nation. Mere words cannot capture the enormity of their sacrifice or the anguish of loved ones they left behind.

Honor those who serve today.

On this Memorial Day remember and pray for our troops who are in harm’s way today.  And pray for their families and loved ones as they endure the hardship and uncertainty of deployment.

Memorial day combo(1)

“As we honor their memory today, let us pledge that their lives, their sacrifices, their valor shall be justified and remembered for as long as God gives life to this nation.”  
Ronald Reagan

God bless America!

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Christian Street Preacher Arrested 3 Times – Thomas More Law Center Files Federal Action

May 22, 2013 by

ANN ARBOR, MI – In three separate incidents beginning May 2011, David Allen, a Christian street preacher in Houston, Texas, was arrested, searched, jailed, and repeatedly denied his constitutional rights to free speech and free exercise of religion. He was never convicted on any of the charges.  To stop further harassment, the Thomas More Law Center (TMLC) a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan announced it filed a federal lawsuit late last week on behalf of Allen.

TMLC’s Erin Mersino is lead attorney in the case.  She is assisted by Texas attorneys, Joseph R. Gutheinz of Friendship, Texas, and Houston attorney Jerad Wayne Najvar.  The City of Houston, its Police Chief, and three Houston Police Officers are named as defendants in the lawsuit.  Click here to read full complaint.

Allen’s three arrests occurred while he was preaching the Gospel message against the sins of abortion, homosexuality, and adultery on public sidewalks in Houston, Texas.  His preaching included donning a wool prayer shawl called a “Tallit” and sounding a ram’s horn known as a “Shofar”.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, commented:

“This case is primarily about the right of a Christian preacher, exercising his rights to free speech on the public sidewalks of Houston, to condemn what he believes are sins of our society. The Supreme Court has held that public sidewalks are traditional public forums where speech cannot be restricted based on content. So, as long as Mr. Allen is not violating any constitutionally valid laws, the police cannot arrest him or otherwise interfere with his right to free speech just because they don’t like his message or the way he is expressing it.”

Allen’s first arrest occurred in May 2011 while he was praying on a public sidewalk in front of the local Planned Parenthood facility.   Two Houston police officers arrested Allen, handcuffed and placed him in the back of the police squad car for approximately 45-60 minutes in suffocating heat without air conditioning.  Allen was removed from the squad car only after a third officer noted that he had been overcome by the heat.  Upon his removal, he collapsed to the ground and had to be rushed to a hospital for medical treatment.

The second arrest occurred in October 2011, while Allen was preaching on a Houston street corner.   The case was ultimately dismissed by the prosecutor for lack of evidence that a crime had been committed.

In January 2012, Allen’s third arrest occurred while he was preaching on a Houston street.  He and another preacher hoped to spread the Gospel to the crowd of spectators gathered for the Houston Marathon.  Allen was jailed for most of the day until his wife was able to obtain his release by posting a bond.  He was charged with failure to obey a lawful order and possession of a ‘staff’ – referring to his Shofar.  The case was dismissed when police failed to appear in court.

TMLC’s lawsuit cites repeated violations of David Allen’s constitutional First Amendment rights to free exercise of religion and free speech by officers of the Houston Police Department.  The lawsuit also claims Allen’s arrest and detainment without probable cause or lawful authority violated the Fourth Amendment protection against unlawful search and seizure.  TMLC’s lawsuit seeks to stop the Houston Police Department from future constitutional violations and harassment of David Allen as he exercises his right to preach the Gospel on the public sidewalks of the City.

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 11
  • Page 12
  • Page 13
  • Page 14
  • Page 15
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 101
  • 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