Lown et al. v. The Salvation Army et al. (Challenge to Government-Funded, Faith-Based Practices of The Salvation Army)

Case Status

Open

Case Description

(S.D.N.Y., Index No. 04 Civ. 1562 (SHS)) (direct).

This lawsuit challenges the government-funded, faith-based practices of The Salvation Army: its attempt to engage in the religious indoctrination of its social services employees; its provision of social services that are tailored to its religious principles; and its trimming of its workforce to convey its religious message.

Although The Salvation Army is an evangelical Christian organization, for many years it performed its responsibilities as a government-funded social services agency in the New York metropolitan area without injecting religion into its workplace and into its provision of social services. With its recent "Reorganization Plan," however, The Salvation Army intends to provide social services only in a manner consistent with its religious principles, and all social service employees must acknowledge and adhere to this requirement regardless of legal and ethical standards.

Plaintiffs contend that the government defendants are providing substantial and direct funding to a religious entity that seeks to use such funding to convey its religious views in the provision of social services and that seeks to tailor and indoctrinate its workforce to convey those views. The NYCLU alleges that such actions violate the Equal Protection Clauses of the federal and state constitutions as well as the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Plaintiffs further contend that The Salvation Army is engaged in a joint enterprise with the government defendants to provide child welfare and other government-mandated essential social services. As such, The Salvation Army is a state actor for purposes of the application of constitutional limitations, and its actions therefore violate the prohibition against religious discrimination secured by equal protection and free exercise clause principles. Finally, plaintiffs argue that the discriminatory conduct of The Salvation Army violates federal, state and local anti-discrimination provisions.

All defendants moved to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action. The Department of Justice has appeared as amici in support of The Salvation Army. The motion is sub judice.

In a mixed decision issued on Sept. 30, 2005, US District Court Judge Sidney Stein refused to dismiss claims by the New York Civil Liberties Union against various City and State social services agencies for the improper use of government funds by the Salvation Army to convey religious messages in their social services programs in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The judge also ruled that the NYCLU may proceed against the Salvation Army with claims of retaliation against employees for filing claims of religious discrimination. Judge Stein, however, dismissed claims that the Salvation Army and the government agencies had engaged in impermissible employment discrimination by requiring employees in the government funded programs to disclose their religious beliefs and practices and to uphold the evangelical Christian mission of the Salvation Army.

Currently, this case is in discovery.

Attorneys involved in this case include Beth Haroules, Deborah H. Karpatkin, Donna Lieberman, Arthur Eisenberg, (NYCLU); Martin Garbus, Howard Rubin, Gregg Brochin (Davis & Gilbert).

Printer-friendly Version