December 04, 2007
Appeals Court Rules in Religious-Charity Prison Case
By Debra E. Blum
A federal appeals court last week affirmed a lower court’s ruling that government funds for an evangelical Christian rehabilitation program at an Iowa state prison violates the constitutional separation of church and state.
But the three-judge panel overturned the lower court’s order directing the Christian group that runs the prison program to repay the roughly $1.5-million in state money it received starting at the end of 1999.
The case is the latest in an ongoing battle over government support for sectarian organizations. The Bush Administration has been pushing to allow religious groups greater access to social-services grants, but courts across the country have repeatedly cautioned that mixing too much religion into programs violates the First Amendment’s prohibition against the government promoting religion.
The decision in the Iowa case was no surprise to Robert W. Tuttle, a law professor at George Washington University who monitors lawsuits involving government and religion.
“That’s where constitutional law is right now,” he said. “The government can fund religious organizations, but it can’t directly fund religious activities.”
In 2003 Americans United for Separation of Church and State, in Washington, filed a lawsuit on behalf of Iowa taxpayers and inmates against the InnerChange Freedom Initiative, an organization affiliated with Prison Fellowship Ministries, in Lansdowne, Va., which runs a prison program in Iowa and five other states.
A U.S. District court ruled last year that InnerChange’s program in a prison near Des Moines was unconstitutional because of its explicit reliance on Christian teachings and because it was paid for at least in part by the state Department of Corrections.
The court ordered the Iowa corrections department to end the program, and for InnerChange to give back the $1.5-million the group had received for it.
Prison Fellowship and InnerChange appealed the decision.
The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals said in its decision last week that the lower court was correct in ruling that the InnerChange program violated provisions of both the First Amendment and the Iowa constitution. But the appeals court clarified that the lower court’s ban against the program would apply only if it continued to operate using government aid.
The appeals court also said the lower court had erred in ordering InnerChange and Prison Fellowship to reimburse the state, saying the lower court did not take into consideration that state officials considered the program beneficial and had acted in good faith in giving money to it.
The Christian groups, however, will have to repay the state money it received after the June 2006 lower-court ruling.
Mark Earley, Prison Fellowship’s president, said that money — about $160,000 — was put in escrow and will be returned immediately.
He said the Iowa program has been operating without government money since June of this year and will continue to do so. He said InnerChange’s eight other programs also operate entirely with private money.
Prison Fellowship is still deciding whether to appeal, Mr. Earley said.
Meanwhile, Americans United is hailing the decision.
“This ruling is a major setback for the White House’s ‘faith-based initiative,’” Alex J. Luchenitser, a lawyer with Americans United, said in a written statement. “It reaffirms that the government must ensure that public funds are not used for religious instruction, and that the government must not aid programs that discriminate based on religion.”
Comments
Commenting is closed for this article.
Previous: Red Cross President Resigns Under Pressure
Next: Boards Change Governance Policies in Response to Congress
I have a doctorate in counselor education and know well that every type of counseling is based on a belief system that is humanistic, Christian, Buddhist, secularistic, Jewish, or something else. Americans United would rather see people in trouble suffer than a charity with and explicit philosophy help them get better.
— Gary Sweeten Dec 4, 01:08 PM #
Gary’s comment raises the question of what the charity’s true mission is. Is it to relieve the suffering of people in trouble, or to evangelize? If it’s the former, there are certainly many ways this can be done without a specific religious component. If the religious component is an essential part of the charity’s work, then it should not receive public funding.
— Phyllis Dec 5, 10:04 AM #
IFI has changed the life of a friend of mine, yet at the same time, it was the only show in town that could offer him anything truly beneficial. He just happens to be comfortable with Christianity, so IFI worked for him. It’s not IFI’s fault that it does a good job at both evangelism and rehab. Sadly, there are no secular groups I know of with the drive and mobilized resources to get in there and do the counseling, networking, family building and after care support IFI does so very well. Those of us who would like to see more prisoners benefit from what IFI does without the evangelistic overlay should learn from their successes and shortcomings, then figure out some creative alternatives. I am by no means a conservative Christian but from my personal exeperiences with the program, I can say it is top notch.
— Karrie Beebe Dec 16, 11:40 AM #