Deadline set in banned Bible study case
Pastor Dale Morgan
Deadline set in banned Bible study case*
Demand letter warns of 'irreparable' harm from First Amendment violation
Posted: May 28, 2009
11:50 pm Eastern
By Bob Unruh
Code enforcement officials in San Diego who banned a pastor and his wife
from holding Bible studies in their home or face fines have taken less
than 24 hours to respond to a demand letter from a legal team
representing the couple in what could be a major First Amendment dispute.
And now they have a deadline to withdraw statements that lawyers believe
already have created an irreparable violation of the First Amendment.
Dean Broyles, the chief of the Western Center for Law & Policy, said
that the letter was dispatched to Pam Elias, chief of the land use
division for the county of San Diego, on Tuesday, and a meeting was held
among the parties yesterday.
The letter demanded the county "agree in writing to rescind
Administrative Citation #DPLU-40576 and the accompanying Cease and
Desist Order" that told Pastor David and Mary Jones they would be fined
and penalized "if they continue to hold their weekly Bible study in
their home."
The letter from Broyles said the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the
loss of First Amendment freedoms, "even for minimal periods of time,
unquestionably constitutes irreparable harm."
And it provided a deadline for the county to respond.
"As a result, time is of the essence, and both the Joneses and the WCLP
respectfully demand that written confirmation of the county's agreement
to permit the Joneses to continue holding their regularly scheduled
Bible study in their home without further threat of sanction be provided
within five business days of the date of this letter. Should the county
fail or refuse to comply, the Joneses are prepared to pursue all
available legal remedies, including litigation."
Last week, we broke the story about the case that apparently was sparked
by a complaint from a visitor to a residence of one of the Joneses'
neighbors.
The sequence of events developed this way.
"On April 10, 2009, Good Friday, a female county employee came to the
Joneses' residence. The county employee appeared in the front yard and
proceeded to take pictures of our clients' home," the letter said. "She
noticed the Joneses' daughters in the front yard and asked to speak with
their mother. Although she did not provide any paper work or
identification, subsequent information obtained by the WCLP leads us to
believe that the county employee who went to the Joneses' residence was
Code Enforcement Officer Cherie Cham."
"Do you have a regular weekly meeting in your home? Do you sing? Do you
say 'amen'?" the official reportedly asked. "Do you say, 'Praise the Lord'?"
The pastor's wife answered yes.
She says she was then told, however, that she must stop holding
"religious assemblies" until she and her husband obtain a Major Use
Permit from the county, a permit that often involves traffic and
environmental studies, compliance with parking and sidewalk regulations
and costs that top tens of thousands of dollars.
If they fail to pay for the MUP, the county official reportedly warned,
the couple would be charged escalating fines beginning at $100, then
$200, $500, $1000, "and then it will get ugly."
Remind the world who's really in charge with the "Worship GOD, not GOV"
magnetic bumper sticker from WND.
"Four things become clear when this case is legally analyzed," said the
letter. "First, the Joneses' weekly Bible study is not a 'religious
assembly' as defined by the county's ordinances rendering the
requirement of an MUP inapplicable. Second, the county's order to stop
hosting the weekly Bible study is a blatant violation of the Joneses'
First Amendment right to freely exercise their religion.
"Third, the order also violates their First Amendment right to peaceably
assemble. Fourth, the county's action is a substantial burden on the
Joneses' ability to practice their religion in violation of the
Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000," the
letter said.
Elias did not return a telephone message asking for comment.
But Broyles said the result of yesterday's meeting was an agreement that
the status quo would be preserved while the dispute is resolved –
meaning there will be no fines or other citations for the family from
the county.
"They acknowledged all the publicity the case was getting. That's part
of the reason they met with us so quickly," he said.
He also said the county appeared to be "backing off" the religious
assembly angle in favor of considering "other issues," such as parking,
to apply in the case.
"Our concern with that is that they're trying to change the aspects of
the case," he said. "They want to back out gracefully."
Instead, Broyles said, the citations should be withdrawn and the county
should apologize.
"They were targeting our clients' religious exercise," he said.
A forum page for the local Channel 10 television station featured a
number of comments in support of the couple after it reported on the
initial controversy.
"This is absolutely disturbing – and if true (I have no reason to doubt
that it is), then the line of questioning reported in the victim's
testimony as conducted by this official was completely wrong,
unconstitutional, and a clear violation of the public's trust," said one
contributor. "Our government is not the thought police – that official
had no business whatsoever asking those questions, and it deeply
concerns me to see such a line of questioning be even tolerated to exist
as a matter of public perception without the leadership of SD County
issuing a public apology and making their role in this matter very
clear: this regulation does not apply to this home bible study – nor any
other private home gathering for that matter."
The letter said a group that averages about 15 in attendance clearly
does not involve a "religious assembly."
The county definition for that is "public assembly such as customarily
occurs in synagogues, temples, and churches."
"These facts along are sufficient to render (the citation) invalid," the
letter said.
But it said the issue also involves the First Amendment.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof…" the letter quoted from the First
Amendment.
The citation and cease and desist order "were directed solely towards
the Joneses' religious activity," the letter said. "Specifically, the
Joneses were not asked to stop hosting any kind of assembly generally,
they were ordered to stop 'religious assembly.' Indeed, if the county
was not targeting religious activity per se, it would presumably have to
forbid any and all secular events where friends and neighbors are
invited to a resident's home on a regular basis, including, but not
limited to in-home poker games, book club meetings, Monday night
football parties, girl and boy scout meetings, Tupperware parties, Bunco
nights, bridge clubs, etc."
Broyles earlier said that oppressive governments, such as communist
China or Nazi Germany, worked to repress home fellowships, labeling them
the "underground church" or "subversive groups," legally compelling
Christians to meet only in sanctioned, government-controlled "official"
churches.
"Therein lies my concern," Broyles said. "If people can't practice their
religious beliefs in the privacy of their own homes with a few of their
friends, that's an egregious First Amendment violation."