A federal judge has ruled that polling sites located within houses of worship do not violate the constitutional separation of church and state. Jerry Rabinowitz had sued the Palm Beach County elections supervisor in December (as reported HERE on YW) because his voting precinct is in a church.
He claimed that casting a ballot amid crucifixes and other religious features mounted to a breach of church-state separation. Rabinowitz argued that elections officials refused to remove or cover religious materials at Emmanuel Catholic Church when he voted there in November.
According to the judge’s ruling, the location of the polling place does not endorse a specific religion.
(Source: WPTV)
' } });
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
13 Responses
This is a poor ruling. Even if the judge is correct with repect to the “Establishment” clause of the First Amendment, there is another clause that guarantees every American the “Freedom of Religion.” Thus since it’s against our religion to enter a church (for whatever reason), placing the ballot box in a church constitutes a violation of our religious beliefs. If I were Jerry Rabinowitz, I would get someone like Nat Lewin in Washington DC to appeal the case on constitutional grounds.
Chaim Cohen
Lawrence
Are there any polling stations at public schools, JCC’s or other choice places? With curcfixs & other religious items on display, how is that not a church & state mixture..
—- Thus since it’s against our religion to enter a church (for whatever reason), placing the ballot box in a church constitutes a violation of our religious beliefs. —-
If the municipality purposely placed the polling booth in the church because they were aware that it would prevent frum people from voting, they would violate the first amendment’s freedom of religion, equal protection clause in the fourteenth of the constitution, and probably assorted voting rights statutes.
However, if they placed the voting booth there for convenience, without trying to disenfranchise frum Jews, there is no freedom of religion argument. This is because it would be a law of general applicability. The government has no constitutional duty to modify laws of general applicability to accommodate people’s religious beliefs. Otherwise, a lot of people would develop a religion that prohibits paying taxes.
There might be a state law in similar to the Federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, but this is not a first amendment issue.
This MUST be appealed. I hope the Agudah will get into this and ask daas Torah what the halocho is. Jews have the right to vote. Jews are not supposed to enter a church sanctuary . Religious objects are forbidden in public places like schools. So there is a blatant contradiction here. Any voting location must be neutral,for every citizen.It sure looks like an endorsement of a particular religion.
Don’t many/most Rabbonim say that it is permissible to enter a church on voting day to cast one’s vote? Does the State have to cater to every Chumra-Shopper?
As an aside, those of us who have voted in churches know that the polling stations are (at least where I come from) not set up in the sanctuary. You don’t have to walk in, kneel in front of Yoshke on the cross, an pull down on his arm to cast your vote.
Bklynmom: There is no constitutional right to separation of Church and State. I believe it was a Supreme Court Ruling.
What the “Founding Fathers” intended was that there should be no official government religion which Citizens would be obliged to be a part of.
From Wikipedia: “The phrase “separation of church and state” is derived from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to a group identifying themselves as the Danbury Baptists. In that letter, referencing the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, Jefferson writes: “I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.”[4]”
“Mark Levin”, can you expond further?
Chareidim, What kind of chutzpa and azis do you have to call people who refuse to enter a church a “Chumra-Shopper”? It would be more appropriate to call folks who do go in a church “Kula-Shoppers.”
RLLWYR, are you seriously a lawyer???? or did I read that wrong? Whether the ballot box is put there intentionally or not is irrelevant. I agree with hscohen1. there are plenty of other convienent places you could put a ballot box, or is it only supposed to be convienent for the christians????? I definitely think this should be appealed. Because of this many people who could and would vote cant. now they are also limiting our freedom of speech. the constitution is elastic. you cant take it word for word. times change. and whos side are you on anyway?
C.K.Y. in the town that I grew up in we also voted in a chuch and as you said the boths were in a social hall not the main prayer room.
did this guy ask a Rav before he filed suit? the Agudah files a friend of the court brief in many instances – did they file one here or did they stay away from it?
It was out in Palm Beach filed by one guy. I doubt anyone (at the major Jewish org.’s) really noticed this lawsuit to have filed a friend of the court either way.
mdlevine, Did you ask a shaila first? And if you did, were you still okay with going into the church?
Personally, I would never set foot into a Church whether it was technically mutar or not.
Anyone with any sense of the bloody history (Crusades, Blood Libels, Holocaust, etc.) the Church has inflicted upon Klal Yisroel for close to 2,000 years would shutter at the thought of coming close to a church.
Frankly, I cross the street anytime I pass the outside of a church. I’d much quicker vote by absentee ballot.
Ed, way back then, I never heard of the concept of asking a shaila. there was no concept of Torah true Judaism where I lived.
I did ask a shaila about 16 years ago when a co-worker lost her daughter in a car crash. I was told to wait outside and extend sympathy to the family when they were on their way in or out. I was told if there was a vestibule, I could go in and sign the book.
—- RLLWYR, are you seriously a lawyer???? or did I read that wrong? Whether the ballot box is put there intentionally or not is irrelevant. —-
Since you are such an expert on constitutional law, why don’t you read the Supreme Court case Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990), and tell me how you reconcile your bald-faced assertions with the Court’s holding about neutral laws of general applicability.