Month in Review – November 2016

AFLC_Month-in-review_smallBanner (3)Here are the highlights for November 2016:

* On November 5, AFLC Co-Founder and Senior Counsel Robert Muise gave an impassioned presentation on “Fighting for Faith and Freedom” at the “Call to Arms” men’s conference held in Michigan.  The conference was well attended.

* On November 8, election day, we filed our petition for writ of certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the high Court to review our case against President Barack Obama and several of his executive agencies for engaging in unlawful executive action that exceeds the authority of the Executive Branch and thus violates the separation of powers principles enshrined in the Constitution.

* On November 9, we filed our brief and evidentiary proofs supporting our lawsuit countersuing on behalf of our client, Urth Cafe, seven Muslim women for trespass.  The trespass claim followed on the heels of a lawsuit filed by the seven women claiming they were subjected to religious discrimination when the Urth Caffe asked them to leave because the women refused to abide by the café’s seating policy. The women later made the fraudulent claim that they were evicted from the café because they wore hijabs—Islamic head coverings worn by some Muslim women.   On November 23, AFLC Co-Founder and Senior Counsel David Yerushalmi argued before the court that the trespass claim against the Muslim women should proceed to trial.  The court agreed and ruled in our favor.

* On November 14, we filed our notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in our case against the Attorney General of the United States, Loretta Lynch, in which we are challenging Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) under the First Amendment.  Section 230 provides immunity from lawsuits to Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, thereby permitting these social media giants to engage in government-sanctioned censorship of free speech.  The lower court incorrectly held that our clients lack standing to pursue their claims.

* On November 21, we disclosed our expert witness, Stephen C. Coughlin, and provided a copy of his expert report in the case in which we are defending the owners of an Oklahoma gun range who refused to allow a Muslim (who happened to be a CAIR board member who showed up at the range with a hidden recording device in order to set up this lawsuit) to shoot at their range for fear of his ties to terrorism.  CAIR is claiming religious discrimination.

* On November 22, we filed a federal civil rights lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan against the City of Westland, Michigan, its Chief of Police, several police officers, the Northland Family Planning Clinic, its CEO and two of its employees on behalf of Kimberley Thames, a pro-life advocate who was falsely arrested and imprisoned in violation of her constitutional rights.

* On November 25, we filed our briefs in support of our amended complaint against Professor Gary Vargas, Mt. San Jacinto College District, and two of the College’s senior administrators.  We filed the lawsuit on behalf of Professor Denise Nussbaum, a tenured full professor and former long-standing chair of the sociology department, after she was physically attacked by Vargas for her outspoken support of Israel and women and after the College retaliated against her for bringing the lawsuit against Vargas.

* On November 30, we provided yet another update to the D.C. Circuit in our case Priests for Life v. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, which was one of the seven consolidated cases recently before the U.S. Supreme Court.  We previously submitted comments to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on behalf of Priests for Life in response to the federal government’s Request for Information regarding possible changes to the HHS Mandate and its application to objecting religious organizations.  The government sought this information following the Zubik decision by the Supreme Court which vacated (nullified) all of the adverse lower court decisions.  The parties are awaiting the government’s decision as to whether it will be revising the regulations.  It is likely that the Trump administration will simply do away with the mandate, thereby ending this assault on religious freedom.

Thank you for your prayers and your financial support.  We couldn’t do what we do without them!

God bless you, and may God continue to bless America!

Please remember to “like” us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter!