Update 12/4/2009: Since this post another 81 First Amendment case victories have been reported totalling 158 since 06/2008. See label First Amendment Case Victories for most recent to later.

Now back to original post...

Below are 4 more First Amendment Case victories bringing us now to 77 victories since 06/2008 and that is just the cases that have been won and only those reported on at Values Voter News. See trail of all cases beginning at 73 First Amendment case victories since 06/2008. Why no media attention?. Most of these cases you will find links to the actual opinion by the courts. Why won't Big Media report on even one? See Commercialism and Capitalism are not the cause to Big Media bias. Only Big Media would have you conclude that way....Do your own test!!!

Minnesota

ADF: Tax-exempt status safe for Ramsey County church

Tax-exempt status safe for Ramsey County church

ADF-allied attorneys obtain settlement on behalf of church originally under threat with nearly 800 other ‘church organizations’
ST. PAUL, Minn. — Two Alliance Defense Fund allied attorneys have succeeded in obtaining a settlement on behalf of a Ramsey County church once under threat of losing its tax-exempt status along with nearly 800 other churches and related organizations in the county. County officials had originally demanded that 784 “church organizations” submit forms and information or else risk loss of tax-exempt status, despite Minnesota law that exempts churches from such requirements.
“Government officials have no right to harass churches in violation of state law,” said ADF Senior Counsel Joe Infranco. “The county’s threat to revoke the property tax exemptions of hundreds of churches unless they submitted a pile of documents was arbitrary and violated Minnesota law. Some of the documents sought were not required for churches and did not exist, but the county demanded them regardless. We’re pleased that, in the case of this church, the county has decided to do the right thing. We hope they will do the right thing by the other churches as well.”



Ramsey County sent letters to all of the “church organizations,” including Advent Evangelical Lutheran Church, questioning property tax exemptions for various reasons. The letters demanded the churches submit tax exemption forms, incorporation documents, bylaws, financial statements, and other information or else face the loss of tax-exempt status, even though Minnesota law does not require churches to file such documentation. Advent risked losing its property tax exemption on undeveloped land the church has owned since 1957. ADF-allied attorneys Lynn Basich and Valerie LeMaster came to the church’s aid.
Basich filed two motions for waiver of tax payments on behalf of the church so that the church would not be subject to property taxes while its lawsuit, Advent Evangelical Lutheran Church v. County of Ramsey, moved forward in the Minnesota Tax Court. The chief judge of the tax court signed the order in May 2008. Now the county has agreed to settlement of the lawsuit and has agreed that all parcels of land the church owns will be considered tax-exempt. The county will correct their records to show the properties were also exempt during the tax years 2007 and 2008.
“The pastors and lay people of Advent Lutheran Church are relieved and satisfied with the outcome of this case,” Basich said. “The congregation is now free from the fear of losing its beloved church and having its property taken away from it.”
Missouri
Open road for Mo. ‘Choose Life’ plates after 8th Circuit clears detour
ADF attorneys win victory in decision that upholds ruling against state’s unconstitutional license plate approval process
KANSAS CITY, Mo. — Alliance Defense Fund attorneys secured a victory from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit over Missouri Department of Revenue officials Thursday, clearing the way for the creation of “Choose Life” specialty license plates. In the lawsuit, ADF attorneys alleged the state violated Choose Life of Missouri’s free speech rights by engaging in viewpoint discrimination when it refused to approve the specialty plate based on its objection to the pro-life message while allowing the messages of other organizations on other specialty plates.
“The state shouldn’t discriminate against pro-life organizations for their beliefs,” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Joel Oster, who argued before the 8th Circuit in October of last year. “We are pleased with the 8th Circuit’s decision to recognize the unconstitutionality of the state’s approval process and look forward to the inclusion of Choose Life in Missouri’s specialty license plate program.”
ADF attorneys filed suit in federal court against Missouri Department of Revenue officials in June 2006 after two Missouri senators–both responsible for reviewing the specialty plate applications–objected to the viewpoint of the message on a license plate proposed by Choose Life of Missouri. ADF attorneys argued that the state’s approval process, contained in Missouri Revised Statutes section 21.795(6), failed to provide sufficient decision-making criteria and therefore unconstitutionally allowed the approval committee too much of their own discretion in considering specialty plate applications. The 8th Circuit agreed.
“Because section 21.795(6) allows the Joint Committee unbridled discretion to determine who may speak based on the viewpoint of the speaker, we find that section 21.795(6) allows for viewpoint discrimination and is therefore unconstitutional,” the court wrote. “The Joint Committee can still review and approve or deny specialty plate applications based on the criteria provided [elsewhere in the law]; it simply cannot deny an application based on the viewpoint of the speaker….”
In January 2008, a federal court ruled in favor of Choose Life, determining that the state’s statute outlining the approval process for specialty plates was unconstitutional. The state appealed the ruling to the 8th Circuit, which refused to stay the district court’s decision while the case was on appeal. Last week, the state began to issue the plates, which Missouri motorists can order via the Internet.
An ADF ally, the National Legal Foundation, filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case in support of Choose Life.
* Opinion issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit in Roach v. Stouffer"
Texas

Federal Judge Upholds Texas Pledge Containing Phrase “Under God”

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott reports: “A Dallas federal judge has ruled that the phrase ‘under God’ in the Texas Pledge of Allegiance is constitutional. The court’s decision rejected a lawsuit filed by a Dallas couple, who unsuccessfully argued that the state pledge violated the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause.”
Opinion: Croft v. Perry, No. 3:07-CV-1362-K (N.D. Texas March 26, 2009)"
Kansas

Wichita Gives Settlement To Pastor After False Arrest

The City of Wichita, Kansas Gives Settlement To Pastor After False Arrest For Exercising His Right Of Religious Freedom
During Wichita’s “Gay Pride Fest” in June of 2007, Mark Holick, the Pastor of Spirit One Christian Center, went with about 30 members to a park downtown where the gay fest was going to end. They went to spread the message of salvation and its power over the abomination of sodomy.
However, once they arrived at the public park, they were told they had to move out of the park and beyond the street just outside the park or face arrest. Within minutes, the police had arrested Pastor Holick for trespassing on a public sidewalk..The arrest was made before they were able to speak at the festival, according to Pastor Holick.
The Christians were treated here as though they were second rate citizens. Pastor Holick filed a motion to dismiss the case and the City Attorney quickly dropped the charges. However the damage had been done, so Pastor Holick along with an attorney named Joel Oster of the Alliance Defense Fund, filed a federal lawsuit against the city.
It took a year and a half, but they were able to reach an agreement upon. The City of Wichita was required to pay the attorney fees, give Pastor Holick $11,700.00, and a “Consent Agreement” where the City of Wichita and the WPD admit their unlawful arrest and violation of Christian rights. The “Consent Order” of the City of Wichita states in part:
“WHEREAS the Defendants (City of Wichita/WPD) do not contest that they violated Plaintiff’s (Pastor Mark Holick’s) constitutional rights…

“NOW, THEREFORE, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED AS FOLLOWS:
1. Defendant (City of Wichita/WPD) violated Plaintiff’s (Pastor Mark Holick’s) rights to free speech, due process, and free exercise of religion by arresting him based on his religious speech in a traditional public forum.”
2. The City of Wichita agrees to permit Mark Holick to engage in his First Amendment rights in the future on the same terms and conditions as all other citizens, and will not be discriminated against due to his religious speech.”
3. The city Defendant has paid Plaintiff $11,700.00 in damages for the unlawful arrest in accord with the City’s ordinary accounting procedures.”

Pastor Holick stated, “Hopefully, due to this settlement, in the future, the Christians in Wichita will have the freedom to practice their God given inalienable Christian religious rights, without fear of arrest due to their Christian beliefs, even when that belief is not popular or politically correct.”
He continues to pursue is religious rights by using his church’s marquee with post messages such as, “AMERICA WE HAVE A MUSLIM PRESIDENT THIS IS SIN AGAINST THE LORD! EX. 20:3.”