Quick Note: Legal Commentary on McCollum Ruling

Jason Pitzl-Waters —  June 5, 2011 — 24 Comments

As the recent Ninth Circuit Court decision in Patrick McCollum’s case against the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation reverberates through our community, those familiar with the law (and “legalese”) are weighing in. Yesterday I quickly pointed out Rhett Aultman’s commentary on the McCollum decision, in which he explains why he thinks the decision was sound and what steps we should be taking from this point. I’d also like to point my readers to the comments made at this site by Alley Valkyrie, a paralegal who works for a lawyer that specializes in federal civil rights litigation. She also thinks the ruling on standing was appropriate. Now, fellow Pagan blogger Hecate, herself a lawyer, gives a clear breakdown of what the ruling is, and where McCollum, his legal team, and the larger Pagan community (and its allies) should go from here.

“Judge Schroeder sets out a clear path that shows how to build a successful case. Pagans need to request visits from Pagan chaplains (in hospital, when they are concerned about their family members, before appeals and other trials, etc.) and document that they get denied because their chaplains are not “regular paid chaplains.” They’ll probably also have to accept a visit from, say, a Catholic priest who counsels them about the evils of Witchcraft and then show why that didn’t work for them. And then, with the help of McCollum, those willing to raise funds and do magic, etc., they’ll have to pursue their claims in a timely manner.

This is the work of a number of years. It’s not nearly as likely to sustain long-term Pagan interest as, say, a run at SCOTUS, which, as I’ve noted above, is, at best, a pipe dream and, at worst, a way to have this loss turned into a complete and total loss. But it’s how civil rights have always been won. Thurgood Marshall laid out a long-term, multi-year, incremental route to Brown v. Board of Education. And he won.”

I know I say “read the whole thing” a lot when I link to essays, but here I really, really, mean it. I encourage everyone, especially my fellow Pagans who produce media, to start from the top and work your way down. The issue of standing vs arguing the actual case has tripped up a few commentators around the web, and if we’re going to have  a productive discussion on this issue we need to be clear what was actually decided here, and what our options are going forward.

As this goes forward, I’m hoping to get commentary from Patrick McCollum once he’s back in the country, and ideally from someone on Patrick’s legal team so they can share their opinions and analysis of the ruling. I’ve been covering this story for years now, I plan to continue covering it in the future. We have to collectively keep our eyes on the prize here, and not forget about the rights of Pagan prisoners if a high-profile SCOTUS appeal doesn’t happen. I’d like to thank Hecate, Rhett, and Alley for lending their expertise toward helping us grasp this decision, and what the options are going forward.

Jason Pitzl-Waters

Posts

  • Henry Buchy

    Two things I suggest is start from the ground up through due process at the inmates end, via the grievance procedure. it will document and provide a proof of need. That will take some time.
    Second is to consider the requirements for chaplaincy. I know federal prison chaplaincy requires at least a B.A. from an accredited school and a Masters in Divinity from an ATS. State regs may differ, but not by much http://www.bop.gov/jobs/job_descriptions/chaplain
    No sense in winning paid chaplaincy for 'pagans' if there isn't the supporting accredited infrastructure for education and endorsement, unless there's intent to challenge the requirements as well.

    • Rhett

      Yes, sir. Yes, sir. Yes, sir.

    • Tina Porter

      Must be why I am in the process of getting a B.A. in religion from a accredited college and then attempting my Masters of Divinity at what is hoped to be soon an accredited pagan seminary. This should help prove that pagan clergy are not just self-ordained, untrained personnel trying for the same rights as those who have the expensive degrees.

    • http://egregores.blogspot.com/ Apuleius

      Any degree requirements should be resisted. Obviously the government cannot dictate how a given religious tradition chooses to educate its clergy. It would be interesting to find out more about what kinds of qualifications are typically accepted for non-Christian traditions that already have official, paid chaplains in the California system: Jewish, Muslim and Native American.

      The Federal requirement (that is, the requirements for a GS12 Federal Bureau of Prisons job as a chaplain) looks like it is highly problematic from a Constitutional perspective. The accrediting body (ATS) it refers to appears to be overtly Christian, and their idea of diversity appears to be limited to Catholicism, Protestantism and Orthodoxy. As with the case of California, it would be interesting to find out more about the qualifications required for Jewish, Muslim, Native American, etc, chaplains already working in the Federal system (I'm assuming there must be some).

  • http://www.occultcorpus.com Caliban

    Getting an accredited Pagan seminary is a goal all its own, but this does help underline why we need one – at least to work within the chaplaincy programs as they exist. I question whether the effort is worth it or if we lose more than we gain by allowing others to define for us what constitutes valid religious organizations, paths to priesthood and excersise of religion.

    • Henry Buchy

      true enough. My own preference would be to challenge the payment of clergy of any religion with public funds. I've said before I feel it should be the responsibility of the respective denominations to provide for their own adherents. Perhaps then the only criteria may be counseling accreditation and endorsement of the religious denomination.
      Voices in the 'modern pagan movement' have an interest in establishing paid clergy, and institutions like any of the other recognised religions, so it would appear that option is not on that table. But like any other job, there will be requirements, qualifications and standards of training.
      If the battle to win a position of paid chaplaincy is successful, it become a rather straw victory if the positions can't be filled due to lack of qualifications/accredation.

      • http://egregores.blogspot.com/ Apuleius

        Henry Buchy: "My own preference would be to challenge the payment of clergy of any religion with public funds. I've said before I feel it should be the responsibility of the respective denominations to provide for their own adherents."

        This is a bad idea for two reasons:

        (1) Ensuring that prisoners have the necessary resources, including access to clergy, to meet their "reasonable religious needs" is a basic human rights issue. There is a federal law already to this effect, and the Supreme Court upheld it in 2005 (this specific law only applies strictly and directly to Federal prisons).

        (2) Relying solely on volunteer chaplains lowers standards (you get what you pay for), and also will tend to favor groups and individuals who are interested in "missionary" work, and who have no respect prisoners personal beliefs. Prisoners are literally a "captive audience", and great care must be taken to eliminate, or limit to the extent possible, proselytizing.

        • Henry Buchy

          On point (1) "reasonable religious needs" has no bearing on whether or not the state must provide clergy at the expense of public funds.
          how does point (2) jive with your previous statement "Any degree requirements should be resisted. Obviously the government cannot dictate how a given religious tradition chooses to educate its clergy."
          If that were the case, then standards would be lower, and the same condition would exist whether paid or volunteer. Besides the government isn't dictating how a given religion chooses to educate their clergy but how the chaplains in their employ should be educated.
          Just because the deptartments of correction wouldn't be paying chaplains doesn't necessarily mean they can't maintian requirements as to the standards of the chaplains permitted to operate in their facilities, and those standards would have to be applied uniformly.

          • http://egregores.blogspot.com/ Apuleius

            Henry Buchy: "Just because the deptartments of correction wouldn't be paying chaplains doesn't necessarily mean they can't maintian requirements as to the standards of the chaplains permitted to operate in their facilities, and those standards would have to be applied uniformly."

            Prisons are notoriously underfunded and understaffed. This means that whether paid or not, chaplains become part of the "staff" that must be relied upon to keep any given prison running. This puts prisons in a weak bargaining position, so to speak, if there is no remuneration available for chaplains. As I said already, you get what you pay for.

            Here is how Gary Friedman, chair of Jewish Prisoner Services International, put it in an article he wrote for Corrections Today magazine:

            "Chaplains are still a mainstay of prison operations, but many of their positions are being eliminated or they are being replaced by unqualified community volunteers. Prison religious programs are still widely available to all inmates, but they are increasingly being relegated to faith based units. …. Correctional chaplaincy is a professional discipline, requiring extensive training beyond that of one's own faith group. Staff chaplains must have sufficient working knowledge of divergent faith requirements in order to properly administer the activities of all faith groups. When properly augmented by contract clergy and community resources of other faiths, staff chaplains are highly effective, contributing significantly to the orderly operations of correctional facilities and the rehabilitation of offenders. However, some correctional systems have recently fallen prey to offers of 'free' chaplains from religious organizations whose agendas are self-centered. Consequently, religious programs in those places have suffered greatly, and the religious rights of many inmates have been trampled upon. The integrity of religious programs can be best ensured by retaining professional correctional chaplains and fully using their expertise."

          • Henry Buchy

            As far as volunteers go,you introduced that aspect .As I mentioned above, that doesn't preclude prisons from maintaining their own standards as to who to accept, and to insure the constitutional right of the inmates are not violated. The ultimate burden for redress lie with the inmates, which gets back to my original post. As far as paid chaplains, that burden should fall upon the respective denominations.
            so if ""Any degree requirements should be resisted. Obviously the government cannot dictate how a given religious tradition chooses to educate its clergy."
            How will prisons "ensure professional correctional chaplains" without specifying the criteria for them? Simply paying them isn't going to guarantee competency.Maintaining the higher standards, which Gary Friedman speaks to having requirements as to education and experience.

          • Bookhousegal

            I don't think major academic credentials *and* insisting that chaplains be un-paid are very compatible: for one, that'll always favor the wealthier denominations and those who are interested in spending money to proselytize.

            It'd quite possibly make sense to expect *paid* chaplains to have some kind of credentials, indeed, especially if they're to work full-time or for people of other faiths, but not everyone really trains their clergy in a collegiate setting. It's good that we've got our seminaries, but it's possible we also need to find our own way to do these things as well. Our community probably *should* support training our clergy, (Among a hundred other things. :) ) but I can think of a lot of people without such credentials who'd do a good job, even *just* on a volunteer basis.

            There have been a lot of times when I've just been like, 'Ah, just get me in there, for a visit:' I've certainly got nothing against our seminaries and education and all, but I do kind of come from a rather-more seat-of-the-pants generation. And a few hard knocks, too. If there's something I can do there, I'd really *love* to have the academic backing and all that comes with it, but maybe that's not even the best I could bring there to begin with.

            Things did not go entirely to plan with my education, shall we say. I do much value learning, but with all due respect to academic acheivement, that's probably not how people find the Goddess in *prison.*

          • http://egregores.blogspot.com/ Apuleius

            As far as educational requirements go, these should be scrupulously vetted to ensure that they do not privilege Christians and Christian educational institutions, as the regulations for the Federal Bureau of Prisons chaplaincy program currently appear to do. That much should be obvious.

          • Henry Buchy

            sure it's obvious, as I posted the fed requirements in a previous post. In addition to B.A. ,which isn't limited to ATS accredited schools, it requires a masters degree "or equivalent (20 graduate hours of theology, 20 graduate hours of sacred writings, 20 graduate hours of church history or comparative religions, and 20 graduate hours of ministry courses) from an American Theological School (ATS) accredited residential seminary or school of theology", One of the requirements is that the chaplain be able to accomodate all faiths, so any pagan chaplain will also require study in other faiths as well. Unless of course you're speaking to regulating to faith based units, in which case the chaplain would need only to study their own faith. There are quite a few nondenomiational ATS accredited schools who offer the courses above and accept laypersons, like Pacific School of Religion, Berkeley, California, for instance.
            80 hours total is what two semesters?

          • http://xkcd.com/285 Eran Rathan

            80 hours is four semesters of 20 hours each (which is pretty brutal, most people do 12-18 hours per semester).

          • http://egregores.blogspot.com/ Apuleius

            The Pacific School of Religion is, according to its website: "a multi-denominational Christian seminary."

            "Non-denominational" is Christian-code for "any flavor you want as long as it's vanilla", where "flavor" = religion, and "vanilla" = Christian. So you can have vanilla bean, french vanilla, madagascar vanilla, tahitian vanilla, no-fat vanilla, soy vanilla, almond-milk vanilla, Jeffersonian Vanilla, etc.

            Job requirements are cool, including educational requirements. But a religious requirement is not cool for government jobs, even if it is masquerading as an educational requirement.

          • Rhett

            When chaplaincy comes up, though, you're going to have a hard time with the Title VII argument, so a generic "religious requirements aren't cool for government jobs" won't win in court. I'm not arguing *for* a degree requirement here, because I agree with you that it becomes problematic quickly (though I'd be nice if any poster-child we have has a nice, formal education because that plays well). If we were talking about a computer programming job, yes. Chaplaincy generally is accepted as having a religious requirement of some kind, though.

            I think what would really fly well is to establish criteria somewhere between "arbitrarily considered clergy by the inmates" and "standards comparable to what Christians use for identifying Christian clergy." Perhaps someone who can demonstrate some form of training in the social work aspects of clergy and who is acknowledged by the inmates? I don't know…this is where my legal understanding fades off and a real civil rights attorney would have answers.

          • Henry Buchy

            even the counselling/social work aspect would require a degree if provided by the state.
            At least a B.A. to work in social work under supervision and higher for unsupervised work with the public.
            Christian clergy, depending on the denomination, requires degrees in theological studies. Roman catholic priests in the US usually hold a masters in divinity or theology, I don't know what other denominations require, but I am pretty sure it's at least a Bachelors Degree.

  • Baruch Dreamstalker

    Hecate makes the best case I've seen that the appeals court gave a broad hint as to a way to proceed that might prevail. It would be wisdom to follow up on it.

  • saffronrose

    Hecate, an attorney, says:
    "Thurgood Marshall laid out a long-term, multi-year, incremental route to Brown v. Board of Education. And he won.”

    Chills. This is what the GOP/"religious" right is doing now wrt to women's access to health care in general, and reproductive health care in particular. Labor rights are possibly not far behind.

  • http://egregores.blogspot.com/ Apuleius

    Hi Anne,

    Close study of Christianity has had this effect on many people over the centuries. But that does not change the fact that PSR was established as an institution for the promulgation of the Christian religion in 1866, and today, one and half centuries later, still has the same explicitly stated aim.

  • Henry Buchy

    thta's kinda splitting hairs, since part of the 'criteria' are degrees, and we were talking about the fed requirements, and Friedmans article. So the criteria is education and experience.
    As Apulius mentions the goal is to have qualified well trained chaplains. That's the thrust of Friedmans article.

  • Henry Buchy

    Yep, PSR is one of the more open schools and one of the first theological schools to offer a degree in gay studies. It also has an outstanding world religions cirriculum, training clergy from many different belif systems including 'Pagan'.

  • Joy

    Curious to know whether the federal prisons specifically require an MDiv from an ATS-accredited school, or simply certification from a professional certifying body, such as APC. APC will accept an MDiv from any school accredited by a CHEA organization, so it doesn't have to be ATS. Thanks for any info and/or links~

  • Baruch Dreamstalker

    Any judge may overturn a law if it violates the Constitution. "Activist" is a label applied to how often a judge does this, or what kind of laws s/he overturns. And a judge may be said to "legislate from the bench" if s/he issues a court order (something judges do every day) that others regard as essentially new law; nothing need be overturned.

    Now, how does your comment relate to the topic at hand, and what kind of wingnuts (left, right, religious, secular) do you imagine you are addressing?