COMMERCE CITY, Colo. - On Wyoming’s Wind River Indian Reservation, Winslow Friday is preparing to surrender in his long fight with the federal government.
The seeds of the conflict were planted four years ago, when Friday shot a bald eagle from a tree. His cousin needed a tail fan for an upcoming Sun Dance, the Northern Arapaho tribe’s most important religious ceremony, and Friday wanted to help.
So when he spotted the bird, he seized his chance.
Charged with killing an eagle in violation of federal law, Friday argued that the law hinders the practice of his religion - a battle closely watched on the reservation.
Friday is giving up, though. Having exhausted his legal options, he’s hoping for a plea agreement that would avoid a trial. “The attorneys say that [a trial] would be a losing battle,’’ said Friday, 25.
Friday’s case represents the latest and most high-profile fight in a string of battles over how to balance conservation with religious liberty.
Once endangered, the bald eagle has rebounded in recent decades but remains - along with the golden eagle - under the protection of the federal Eagle Protection Act.
The law provides an exception for American Indians who want eagles for ceremonies: They can acquire birds from the repository or may apply for a permit to “take,’’ or kill, an eagle. Many tribes eschew both options, saying the former can take years and yield unsuitable specimens.
In Wyoming, Friday didn’t pursue either option before he killed the eagle, which carries a maximum penalty of one year in jail and a $100,000 fine.
In 2006, a federal judge dismissed the case. Prosecutors appealed to the US Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, which ruled in favor of the government and ordered Friday to stand trial. This year, the US Supreme Court declined to hear his appeal. Federal prosecutors declined to comment on Friday’s case.
© Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company
Monday, September 28, 2009
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Sentence Not Political Says Kazakhstan FM
ASTANA (Reuters) - Kazakhstan, responding to fierce criticism by international rights groups, has denied that the conviction of human rights activist and government critic Yevgeny Zhovtis was politically motivated.
A court this month sentenced Zhovtis to four years in prison for violation of traffic regulations following a July accident in which his car struck and killed a pedestrian.
Zhovtis, 54, said the harshness of the sentence handed down to him in a brief trial was linked to his professional activities and called the verdict politically charged.
He was accused of failing to make an emergency stop. He said he was blinded by the lights of oncoming cars and could not have prevented the accident.
In a statement issued late on Monday, Kazakhstan Foreign Ministry spokesman Yerzhan Ashykbayev said the verdict was in line with Kazakh law.
"The rule of law principle means the law is equal for everyone," Ashykbayev said. "According to available statistics, there have been 176 such tragic cases in Kazakhstan in January-July and in 136 cases (76 percent) defendants were sentenced to prison terms.
"This proves that the Zhovtis case is not 'exclusive' at all."
A court this month sentenced Zhovtis to four years in prison for violation of traffic regulations following a July accident in which his car struck and killed a pedestrian.
Zhovtis, 54, said the harshness of the sentence handed down to him in a brief trial was linked to his professional activities and called the verdict politically charged.
He was accused of failing to make an emergency stop. He said he was blinded by the lights of oncoming cars and could not have prevented the accident.
In a statement issued late on Monday, Kazakhstan Foreign Ministry spokesman Yerzhan Ashykbayev said the verdict was in line with Kazakh law.
"The rule of law principle means the law is equal for everyone," Ashykbayev said. "According to available statistics, there have been 176 such tragic cases in Kazakhstan in January-July and in 136 cases (76 percent) defendants were sentenced to prison terms.
"This proves that the Zhovtis case is not 'exclusive' at all."
Monday, September 21, 2009
U.S. Faith-Based Hiring Policy Challenged
Nearly 60 groups are pressing the Obama administration to put an end to a Bush-era policy that allowed federally-funded faith-based groups to hire only fellow believers.
In a letter sent September 17, the 58 groups – which include the ACLU, the Anti-Defamation League, and the Human Rights Campaign – asked U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, Jr., to direct the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) to review and ultimately withdraw a 2007 memorandum that they say "threatens crucial religious freedom protections."
“The OLC Memo's interpretation that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 ("RFRA") provides for a blanket override of statutory nondiscrimination provisions is erroneous and threatens core civil rights and religious freedom protections,” wrote the groups, many of which are also members of the Coalition Against Religious Discrimination (CARD).
“We accordingly request that the Obama Administration publicly announce its intention to review the OLC Memo, and that at the end of that review, withdraw the OLC Memo and expressly disavow its erroneous interpretation of RFRA, the most significant free exercise protection of the post-Smith era,” they concluded.
The hiring policy of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives has been a source of controversy since Bush established the office in 2001 and Obama had vowed on the presidential campaign trail to reverse the hiring policy so that groups receiving federal money would no longer be allowed to discriminate based on religion.
In a letter sent September 17, the 58 groups – which include the ACLU, the Anti-Defamation League, and the Human Rights Campaign – asked U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, Jr., to direct the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) to review and ultimately withdraw a 2007 memorandum that they say "threatens crucial religious freedom protections."
“The OLC Memo's interpretation that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 ("RFRA") provides for a blanket override of statutory nondiscrimination provisions is erroneous and threatens core civil rights and religious freedom protections,” wrote the groups, many of which are also members of the Coalition Against Religious Discrimination (CARD).
“We accordingly request that the Obama Administration publicly announce its intention to review the OLC Memo, and that at the end of that review, withdraw the OLC Memo and expressly disavow its erroneous interpretation of RFRA, the most significant free exercise protection of the post-Smith era,” they concluded.
The hiring policy of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives has been a source of controversy since Bush established the office in 2001 and Obama had vowed on the presidential campaign trail to reverse the hiring policy so that groups receiving federal money would no longer be allowed to discriminate based on religion.
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Symposium of the Americas on Liberty
There is a very strong link between religious liberty and the preservation of a democratic state, according to the former U.S. ambassador to the Holy See.
Mary Ann Glendon, a law professor at Harvard University, affirmed this link when she discussed an international symposium to be held Sept. 25-26 in Mexico City.
"Voices: The Secular State and Religious Liberty" will consider the state of religious freedom on the whole American continent.
The event will cover "a variety of topics, from the application of religious liberty in an international context, to specific issues in several countries of the American continent," organizers explained.
Experts from Canada to Chile will focus on philosophical principles, historical antecedents and challenges that religious liberty faces in American countries, particularly Mexico.
Mary Ann Glendon, a law professor at Harvard University, affirmed this link when she discussed an international symposium to be held Sept. 25-26 in Mexico City.
"Voices: The Secular State and Religious Liberty" will consider the state of religious freedom on the whole American continent.
The event will cover "a variety of topics, from the application of religious liberty in an international context, to specific issues in several countries of the American continent," organizers explained.
Experts from Canada to Chile will focus on philosophical principles, historical antecedents and challenges that religious liberty faces in American countries, particularly Mexico.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)