A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit challenging President Donald Trump’s Religious Liberty Commission on Monday, ruling that the advisory panel does not violate a federal requirement that presidential advisory committees be “fairly balanced.”
U.S. District Judge John Cronan, a Trump nominee in New York, rejected arguments that the commission was unlawfully skewed because it included no representatives from non-Judeo-Christian faith traditions.
Federal law requires certain presidential advisory committees to be “fairly balanced,” but Cronan said that standard does not require perfect representation of every religious tradition.
“The RLC must only be ‘fairly’ balanced—not perfectly balanced,” Cronan wrote.
He noted that Christianity and Judaism encompass a wide range of theological and political viewpoints and questioned where the plaintiffs’ argument would end if every faith tradition were entitled to representation. He pointed to the relatively small Sikh population in the United States as an example, asking whether the president would be required to appoint representatives from every religious denomination or adopt a quota system to satisfy the law.
The lawsuit, filed in February by interfaith, Muslim, and Hindu groups, among others, argued that the commission violated the “fairly balanced” rule because it excluded members from non-Judeo-Christian faiths.
The plaintiffs said the commission “excludes perspectives that emphasize the full diversity of American religious life, including those faith traditions that value equal dignity for all” and is imbalanced in its views on issues such as the separation of church and state.
Trump established the commission last year after raising concerns about discrimination against Christians. The commission is chaired by Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, with former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson serving as vice chairman. Other members include the Rev. Franklin Graham and New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan.
Cronan also ruled that one plaintiff, the Rev. Paul Raushenbush, an ordained Baptist minister and president of Interfaith Alliance, lacked legal standing to pursue his claims, dismissing him from the case.
The plaintiffs were represented by Democracy Forward and Americans United for Separation of Church and State.
HOW THE BIG BEAUTIFUL BILL BECAME LAW: READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER’S 10-PART SERIES
In a joint statement following the ruling, the coalition said the lawsuit had nevertheless achieved one of its primary goals by forcing greater transparency from the administration.
“Even before this decision, our litigation helped uncover the information the Trump-Vance administration attempted to hide from the public about this biased and unlawful body,” the organizations said. “Religious liberty and pluralism are foundational American values, and we remain committed to fighting for a democracy that does not promote a single religious belief and ignores others. We are grateful that this case achieved a major goal by forcing greater transparency, and we will continue our work.”
Continue reading...
[ H/T Washington Examiner ]
