Hindu Temple Society of North America, et
al. v. New York Supreme Court, et al.
The Becket Fund filed a federal
lawsuit (PDF format, 167K) on August 4,
2004, on behalf of the Hindu Temple Society
of North America. The suit argues that local
courts are aiding the hostile takeover of the
Temple in violation of the First and Fourteenth
Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
It is ironic that the Hindu Temple Society,
based in Flushing, Queens, New York, is facing
government intervention in its autonomy. The
Flushing Remonstrance of 1657 is the
predecessor to the First Amendment and one of
the oldest expressions of religious freedom in
the world. It reproved the Dutch colonial
Governor Peter Stuyvesant for his attempts to
ban Quakers, a reviled religious minority at the
time. Bowne Street, on which the Temple stands,
is named after John Bowne, whom Governor
Stuyvesant banished from the colony for allowing
Quakers to hold religious services in his home.
(You can read more of the history of the
remonstrance here.)
Supreme Court Judge Joseph G. Golia and his
appointed referee, Long Island lawyer Anthony J.
Piacentini, are forcibly restructuring the
governance of the Temple in response to the
efforts of six dissidents who wish to control
the Temple, some of whom rarely, if ever,
worship there.
The federal lawsuit states that Judge Golia
and Referee Piacentini have used their judicial
offices to take control of the Temple, to
prohibit it from engaging in certain forms of
religious exercise and speech, and to impose a
voting membership requirement, including the
definition of who is a Hindu--all of which
violate the First and Fourteenth Amendments of
the U.S. Constitution. If these orders are
allowed to stand, they will have the effect of
transferring complete control of the Temple-even
who decides which priests will be hired and what
gods will be worshipped-to new individuals. The
complaint states that the court has "absolutely
refused to provide any-much less a 'full and
fair'-opportunity to litigate Plaintiffs'
constitutional defenses to such actions."
The complaint, filed in Brooklyn at the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of New
York, asks the federal court to issue an
injunction barring the local court from further
activity that would jeopardize the rights of the
Temple and its devotees. If successful, the
federal suit would prevent the State from
enforcing an unprecedented intrusion into the
religious affairs of a faith community.
The Becket Fund also filed a memorandum
(PDF format, 443K) in support of a motion for a
preliminary injunction with the court
"restraining Defendants from taking further
action to violate the constitutionally protected
autonomy of the Hindu Temple Society through an
unconstitutional application of the New York
Religious Corporations Law in the state judicial
process." The brief argues, "This extraordinary
relief is warranted. The actions taken against
the Plaintiffs are extreme. The potential
destruction of the Temple’s religious polity is
absolute. The bias of the parties involved is
serious."
The August 4 New York Times featured
an
article about the suit, quoting Becket Fund
Director of Litigation Roman Storzer. The
New York Sun previously ran an editorial
(PDF format, 536K) about The Becket Fund's work
for the Temple.
On October 13, 2004, Justice Joseph Golia of
the Supreme Court of New York granted a
temporary stay to the Hindu Temple Society and
its trustees and devotees, temporarily stopping
an election process that threatens to divide the
community of the nation’s oldest Hindu Temple.
Robert Greene, an attorney for the Becket Fund,
demonstrated to the Court that the planned
election violated the Temple’s First Amendment
rights and flies in the face of state statutes.
Greene also presented a “Petition to Save Our
Temple” with over 2,000 signatures to the Court.
The stay will remain in place until Justice
Golia rules on the Becket Fund’s motion for an
interim stay pending appeal, which is currently
before the Supreme Court.
On September 2, 2004, ten
organizations--representing various religious
denominations--submitted an amicus
(friend of the court) letter (PDF format,
66K) in support of The Becket Fund's motion
for a preliminary injunction against the
defendants of the federal suit.
The Hindu American Foundation presented the
letter on behalf of AGNI Corporation, the
Catholic League for Civil and Religious Rights,
the Hindu Human Rights Group, the Hindu
International Council Against Defamation, Hindu
University of America, Ile Obatala Oya, Kanchi
Kamakoti Seva Foundation, Navya Shastra, and the
Queens Federation of Churches. The Hindu
American Foundation is a human rights
organization that promotes the Hindu and
American ideals of understanding, tolerance, and
pluralism.
"In this letter supporting the Hindu Temple’s
request for injunctive relief, we seek to
highlight two issues of grave concern to the
religious liberty of not only Hindu Americans,
but all Americans," the letter states. "The
first issue implicates the right to free
exercise as guaranteed by the First Amendment of
the U.S. Constitution. If the order of the
Supreme Court of the State of New York (the
“Supreme Court”) is not overturned, an
unprecedented state-sponsored intrusion into the
religious autonomy of the Hindu Temple as well
as the religious practice of the Hindu community
will be allowed in patent violation of the U.S.
Constitution."
The amicus letter discusses how the state
court system has burdened the Hindu Temple
Society's religious practice: "The order
mandating a state-sponsored referee to determine
the method by which the Hindu Temple structures
and governs itself; who qualifies as a member,
an inquiry which potentially includes
determining who qualifies as a 'Hindu; and
imposing rule by a majority of state-approved
members, absent any legal basis, appears
punitive and represents a potentially hostile
interference into the sanctity of the Hindu
Temple. It also clearly interferes with the
Hindu Temple’s ability to function, let alone
exercise its religion, as the Board of Trustees,
which as an entity has governed the Hindu Temple
for the past thirty years, is no longer able
conduct its business including appointing,
hiring and dismissing priests; exercising
authority over the design and expansion of the
temple grounds according to Hindu religious
principles; managing the scheduling of religious
services at the temple; deciding which
divinities will be honored as well as the forms
of devotion that will occur at the temple;
controlling the finances of the temple; and all
other aspects of religious and temporal
activities associated with the temple."
The Hindu American Foundation also explains
that the state court system's rulings ignore how
Hinduism is traditionally practiced. "[B]ecause
Hindu temples, both in India and abroad, have
not traditionally had 'memberships,' several
communities in the U.S. govern their temples
similarly to those in India and abroad,
entrusting management of temple affairs to a
Board of Trustees," the letter states. "However,
regardless of the construct of self-governance
used by any temple in the United States, this is
a function that must be left strictly in the
control of adherents of the particular faith and
not in the hands of the government."
The letter goes on to note, "The second issue
of concern invokes the Fourteenth Amendment of
the U.S. Constitution. Clearly in violation of
the constitutionally guaranteed right to equal
protection under the law, the New York Religious
Corporations Law (“RCL”) distinguishes between
different faiths, providing legal benefits and
custom-tailored laws to majority religious
organizations such as, Baptist, Methodist,
Presbyterian and Roman Catholic churches, while
minority religious organizations, such as Hindu,
Muslim and Buddhist, are pigeon-holed into two
ambiguous subsections referred to as 'Free
Churches' and 'Other Denominations' where laws
are not individualized to best fit their needs
and in some cases, may impose legal
disadvantages."
Articles & News Items
- "Nation's
largest Hindu Temple sues NY Supreme Court,"
August 4, 2004
- "The
New York Times, Hindu Temple to Challenge State
Judge on Religious Grounds," August 4, 2004
- "MSN
India, Hindu Temple condemns US judge,"
August 4, 2004
- "Times
Ledger, Flushing temple claims bias, takes
lawsuit to federal court," August 12, 2004
- "Religion
News Service, Hindus Wage Legal Battle for
Control of Temple," August 17, 2004
- "New
York Newsday, Judge to decide First Amendment
question," August 27, 2004
- "New
Indian Express, New York's Hindu temple attracts
media spotlight," August 27, 2004
- "The
New York Daily News, Temple's fate up in the
air," August 28, 2004
|
