11th Circuit Court of Appeals

Since we took a look at some of the cases Judge Whittemore had been involved in the US District Court, thought I'd share some interesting cases that the 11th has covered in the past year or so.

October 2004 - The the 11th Circuit held today that a public school may remove religious symbols from a student painted mural displayed on school grounds.

At issue in Bannon v. School District of Palm Beach were a series of murals created to beautify parts of the school which were under construction. Subsequent to the murals being painted, the principal required the removal of various images he deemed to be distracting to the education of his students, including Christian iconography, paraphrases of Bible verses and other similar imagery painted by the Plaintiff's daughters.

More on Bannon

December 2004 - The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) does not violate the First Amendment’s ban on government establishment of religion. RLUIPA, which was signed into law by President Clinton in 2000, bars government policies that substantially burden free exercise of religion by prisoners and, in land-use cases, by a person or institution. The government, however, can receive an exemption if it can demonstrate it has a compelling interest and is using the least restrictive means to advance that interest.

The 11th Circuit’s Dec. 2 affirmation of RLUIPA came in Benning v. Georgia, which involves the state prison system’s refusal of an inmate’s requests to practice his Jewish faith. Ralph Benning asked prison officials to allow him to wear a yarmulke and eat only kosher food. When his requests were denied, Benning submitted an internal grievance that was rejected by prison officials before he filed a lawsuit under RLUIPA.

More on Benning

The 11th Circuit Court ruled to deny Elian's right to an asylum in 2000, as well as 2003 ruling that the presence of a Ten Commandments monument in the rotunda of the Alabama State Judicial Building violates the U.S. Constitution.

There was a great deal of attention to Judge Pryor being assigned to this Court of Appeals, not sure if any what impact he will have on this case. However this statment made should be pointed out: (Source)

Pryor considers much of the Supreme Court case law preserving the separation of church and state to be “errors.” At a public rally on behalf of a judge who was sued for praying and displaying the 10 Commandments in court, Pryor announced, “God has chosen, through his son Jesus Christ, this time and this place for all Christians...to save our country and save our courts.” In 1997 Pryor stated, “The matters about life and death and freedom and religion are not being decided in our country anymore by the people and their elected representatives. They are being decided in court, and I think there is something wrong with that.”

This next link contains a listing of cases that mainly deal with disability/discrimination issues:

More information

There are quite a few which is why I felt it better to post that link rather than the cases listed there.

So my review from a non-lawyer status? I think the appeal to this court by the Schlinders depends on the quality of the case they present. If the Lawyers for Terri's parents submit the same type of arguement as they did before Judge Whittemore, it will be refused. If it is not refused? Considering prior federal precedence (Cruzan and Brophy) I still have a hard time seeing how this case can proceed. But....time will tell.