|
10th Circuit
Affirms Punishment of
Christian Police Officer Who Objected to Order Mandating Attendance at
Islamic Event
May 25, 2014
|
|
|
On May 22, 2014, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Tenth Circuit affirmed a lower court decision that the City of Tulsa and
two of its senior police officials, Chief of Police Chuck Jordan and Deputy
Chief of Police Daryl Webster, did not violate the constitutional rights of
Captain Paul Fields, a Tulsa Police officer who was summarily punished for
objecting to an order mandating attendance at an Islamic proselytizing
event held at a local mosque based on his religious beliefs.
Robert Muise, Co-Founder and Senior Counsel of the American Freedom Law
Center (AFLC) and lead counsel for Captain Fields in the case,
commented: “This ruling is troubling on so many levels. We have
argued throughout this case that Captain Fields was summarily punished for
simply raising and asserting a religious objection to the order mandating
attendance at the Islamic event, and that such discriminatory treatment
violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Yet, inexplicably, the
Tenth Circuit refused to address this main issue on appeal, claiming that
it was not raised below. The court is wrong, and we intend to seek
full court review of this patently erroneous decision.”
In its decision, the Tenth Circuit noted that Captain Fields’ briefs
asserted that the City’s “reason for imposing punishment, or at least the
reason for the severity of the punishment, was the religious nature of
Fields’ objection to the order.” The appellate court further noted
that “there is evidence in the record that would support this assertion.
Some statements by TPD officials suggest that at least part of the
motive for punishing Fields was that he posed a religious objection to the
order and refused to attend the mosque event on religious grounds.”
Yet, the court refused to address the issue on appeal, claiming that it was
not raised below. Instead, the court avoided this central issue and
simply held, as did the district court, that the order “did not burden
Fields’s religious rights because it did not require him to violate his
personal religious beliefs by attending the event . . . .”
Muise added: “It is impossible to square the court’s opinion with the
briefs and the record presented on appeal. Indeed, even a cursory
review of our briefing before the district court and in the appellate court
makes clear the basis for Captain Fields’ constitutional claims: he was
singled out for discriminatory treatment and thus punished because he
raised a religious objection to the order. That is religious
discrimination, pure and simple.”
As Muise points out, Captain Fields’ objection to the order was clearly
stated in the email he sent to his chain of command: “Please consider this
email my official notification to the Tulsa Police Department and the City
of Tulsa that I intend not to follow this directive, nor require any of my subordinates to
do so if they share similar religious convictions.”
The official notice of the Internal Affairs (IA) investigation of the
matter also clearly stated “that Chief Chuck Jordan has requested IA to conduct
an administrative investigation in regards to your refusal to attend and refusal to assign
officers from your shift, who shared your religious beliefs, to attend
the” Islamic event.
In fact, when Chief Jordan was asked directly during his sworn deposition
whether it was his “understanding that [he] could have accommodated Captain
Fields’ religious objections to this event if [he] had made it voluntary
for him,” the Chief responded, “Yeah. According to his e-mail, yes, I
could have.”
And if there were any remaining or lingering doubts as to why Captain
Fields was punished, his official performance evaluation, which was signed
and approved by Chief Jordan and Deputy Chief Webster, states that “Captain
Fields was disciplined during this rating period for refusing to attend and refusing to
direct that officers attend a law enforcement appreciation day
at a local mosque.”
David Yerushalmi, AFLC Co-Founder and Senior Counsel, added: “The
evidence is overwhelming that the City and its senior police officials
wanted to make an example of Captain Fields by harshly punishing him, a
Christian, for objecting on religious grounds to an order compelling
attendance at an Islamic event. Consequently, when judges can rewrite
the case and the case history to fit the conclusion they seek, as the Tenth
Circuit has done here, due process is robbed of any meaning.”
For objecting to the order, Captain Fields was punitively transferred,
subjected to an IA investigation, and suspended without pay for two weeks.
As further punishment, he was assigned to the “graveyard” shift.
Yerushalmi concluded: “Had a Muslim officer objected to attending a
Jewish event to be held at a synagogue on a Saturday and the officer was
treated like Captain Fields, there is little doubt that the entire Tulsa
Police Department chain of command would have been fired.”
As the Tenth Circuit acknowledged in its opinion, the undisputed record
evidence demonstrated that during the Islamic event, which was held on a
Friday—the “Sabbath” for Muslims—the Muslim hosts discussed Islamic
religious beliefs; they discussed Mohammed, Mecca, why Muslims pray, how
they pray, and what they say when they are praying; they showed the
officers a Quran; and they showed the officers Islamic religious books and
pamphlets that were for sale and encouraged the officers to purchase them.
Moreover, after the event, the Islamic Society posted on its website
a photograph of the police officers sitting at a table with members of the
mosque with the caption, “Discover Islam Classes for Non-Muslims.”
Consequently, Captain Fields’ objections were completely justified and
substantiated.
The American Freedom Law Center intends to seek a rehearing en banc (full
court) and review in the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary.
Read more about this case.
|
|
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment