The Freedom from Religion Foundation denounced yesterday's U.S. Court of Appeals ruling that allows Orthodox Jews to escape certain prohibitions on the Sabbath in a designated area in Westhampton Beach.

frfThe court rejected moves by Jewish People Opposed to the Eruv to declare invalid an eruv (an area designated by plastic "lechis" tacked to utility poles), that was created on Aug. 8, 2014 in WHB. Pro and anti-eruv factions have spent at least $2 million in actual and donated legal costs arguing the issue since a proposal for an eruv was made on March 7, 2008 by the Hampton Synagogue.

Andrew Seidel, FFRF staff lawyer, said the decision by the court's three judges flies in the face of reason by finding that the eruv is a "secular" (non-religious) designation. "The religious significance of eruvin is unambiguous and indisputable," he said. Lechis have "no meaning except as a visual, public communication of a purely religious concept for religious believers of a single faith," he said.

Also commenting on the eruv was The Friendly Atheist which said an eruv allows the Orthodox to connect poles with string to "create a brand new giant domain" where they can carry items freely even on the Sabbath. This should not happen on utility poles that are on government-owned property, said Hement Mehta, editor of the website.

He expressed "surprise" and "disappointment" at the decision of the Appeals Court. He said it "ignores the principle of church/state separation and suggests that American ignorance is a good excuse for why eruvs can remain in place. Just because most Americans don't understand what an eruv is doesn't take away from the fact that it's a religious symbol on government property. I'm sure religious groups everywhere are already figuring out what they will now be able to get away with in the ight of this decision."

Precedents Cited

Hemant Mehta
Mehta

The Court has sided with eruv supporters in finding that an eruv is "secular." Cited are numerous cases where courts have made such a ruling.

"Every court to have considered whether similar government actions violate the Establishment [of religion] Clause have agreed they do not," said the decision.

One example given is Long Branch, N.J., which in 1987 blocked attempts by the American Civil Liberties Union and others to have an eruv dismantled.

"The city allowed the eruv to be created to enable observant Jews to engage in secular activities on the Sabbath," said that decision. "This action does not impose any religion on the other residents of Long Branch."

Another case cited was the successful defense of an eruv in Tenafly, N.J., in 2000. Robert Sugarman, of Weil, Gotshal and Manges, who has led the defense of eruvs on Long Island for the East End Eruv Assn., also donated free legal advice for that case.

One finding was that a "reasonable, informed observer" of an eruv "would not perceive an endorsement of Orthodox Judaism."

Seidel Says Religious Meaning Is Obvious

Seidel
Seidel

"There is nothing secular about helping a religious sect to comply with religious law," said Seidel. He asked "What would happen if devout Muslims decided to rope off an area in which they would adhere to Sharia law, using public property to designate the area?"

"The government cannot favor one religion by alleviating its self-imposed burdens or allowing it to impose that religion over wide swaths of public and private property," he continued. "This is not freedom of religion; it is the imposition of religion."

Weil's description of its work for the EEEA says "Plaintiffs' free exercise rights are violated by the municipalities' [WHB, Southampton, Quogue] interference with the plaintiffs' contracts with utility companies [Verizon, PSEG/LIPA] for the right to use utility poles to attach the nearly invisible plastic strips that help create the eruv."

Verizon, EEEA Exempted From Case

The Appeals Court said that two of the three defendants, Verizon New York and EEEA, are not "state actors" and dismissed all claims against them. Debevoise & Plimpton, law firm with nearly $700 million in revenues and about 650 lawyers, had submitted a brief July 11, 2014 in behalf of Verizon New York and LIPA vs. WHB et al.

LIPA, as a "political subdivision" of New York State, is a "state actor," they said. Cited is Lemon vs. Kurtzman, http://tinyurl.com/muqhpq a 1968 case that resulted in rules barring "excessive government entanglement" in religious matters or actions that advance or inhibit religious practice. Statutes were to have a "secular" purpose. The Jan. 6 Court of Appeals decision found that the eruvs sought by EEEA are "secular" in nature.

Friendly Atheist Raps Miami Beach Eruv

FFRF commented on an eruv that was created in Pinetree Park in Miami Beach last summer, making many of the same remarks as above. An FFRF letter to Miami Beach attacked the city's claim that eruvin have a "secular" purpose.

Southampton, which has spent at least $700,000 in legal fees and value of time of internal legal counsel in battling erection of an eruv in the town, had no comment on the ruling. It noted that the ruling only pertains to WHB. A Freedom of Information form has been filed with the town seeking the exact value of legal costs in the dispute. Such requests can take up to 20 days before an answer is supplied, the town said. FOI forms have also been filed with WHB and Quogue.

Dear Speir, who operates www.whbqt.info blog in WHB, said that WHB, SH and Quogue had spent a total of $737,374 on legal fees on outside firms as of August 2014 and that the value of donated and charged time of the "white shoe" law firms of Weil, Debevoise & Plimpton and Morgan Lewis are estimated by "knowledgeable sources" as four-to-five times that amount.

He said that Verizon, "while no one was watching," over the past winter began placing lechis on utility poles in WHB "despite the vociferous objections of many" to creation of the eruv.