Meriam Ibrahim, the Sudanese Christian woman who had been sentenced to death for not renouncing her faith in front of a Sudanese court, is free.
Italian vice-minister for foreign affairs Lapo Pistelli posted a picture of himself with Ibrahim and her family on Facebook with a message that read “with Meriam, Maya, Martin and Daniel, a few minutes from Rome. Mission accomplished.
The family will meet with the Pope before flying to the United States to start a new life.
The move was a surprise to everyone associated with the case and there have been no details released yet regarding how Italy was able to get Ibrahim and her family out of the country. Unconfirmed reports say the Italian government and the Vatican entered negotiations two weeks ago to free the family.
Ibrahim’s attorney Mohaned Mostafa told Reuters not only did he not know the she was leaving the country, but that the charges the government was using to keep her from leaving have not been dismissed.
Her family had also been keeping her in the country by suing to have a court declare her a Muslim against her wishes but that suit was dropped earlier this week.
The family of Meriam Ibrahim, who had brought a lawsuit in an attempt to have her declared a Muslim by Sudanese courts, announced they have dropped their lawsuit.
The development could allow the persecuted Christian woman to finally leave the country with her husband and two children for the United States.
Attorney Abdel Rahman Malek would not give a reason that the family was dropping the suit.
The Sudanese government is still holding charges over Ibrahim’s head that she tried to leave the country on false travel documents; however, the family’s attorney says he has evidence to show that the papers are legal under international law.
A New York City area church said this week they would be willing to provide housing, food and other necessities to Ibrahim and her family so they could begin a new life in the United States.
The Sudanese government has not responded to multiple requests from American groups and political leaders to release the family.
A federal judge threw out a lawsuit this week from an atheist group angered over not being able to give uncensored pornographic material to students when Bibles were given out without censorship.
Senior Judge Kendall Sharpe said he threw out the lawsuit because of a change in school policy that allowed the atheists to eventually distribute their book “An X-Rated Sex Book: Sex & Obscenity In The Bible.”
The school had been permitting World Changers of Florida to deliver Bibles to students without interference or censorship when the atheists discovered the program and launched a series of complaints. The radically hostile anti-Christian group Freedom From Religion Foundation backed the atheist group.
The Central Florida Freethought Community says they plan to flood schools with more anti-Christian publications as a result of the court ruling.
The anti-Christian groups said despite the dismissal, the situation was a win for advancing the cause of removing Christians from society.
The Islamists family members of persecuted Christian Meriam Ibrahim are attempting to get the death sentence against her reinstated by trying to prove she was “born a Muslim.”
The family contends that because she’s a Muslim, her marriage to a Christian man is illegal under Sudan’s Sharia Law.
The lawyer hired by the family says they are going to ask Khartoum Religious Court to review the case and declare Meriam Ibrahim “belongs” to the men in her family.
Ibrahim is in hiding at the U.S. Embassy in Khartoum with her American husband and two children. She has been unable to leave the country because of the government’s special police charging her with using illegal documents to leave the country.
Ibrahim’s lawyer Mohanem Mostafa said that the court has not officially notified her of the lawsuit but that he believes the court will dismiss the case.
While the Supreme Court ruling for Hobby Lobby was a major victory for Christian business owners, other lawsuits against the mandate continue to move forward dealing with other questions related to the mandate.
The Little Sisters of the Poor are continuing in their case against the Obama administration’s demand the Sisters sign an “accommodation” to the mandate that their employees can use to obtain contraceptive coverage. The Sisters say that accommodation makes them complicit in something that goes against their faith, namely, abortion.
However, the ruling makes the lawyers for the Sisters believe the court will favorably view them.
“The court’s language indicates the accommodation’s days are numbered,” Daniel Blomberg, legal counsel for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, told the Christian Post.
Blomberg says that he feels confident the court will carry the logic through to his case.
“When it comes to complicity, the government doesn’t get to decide, the religious believer gets to decide,” Blomberg said.
A group of nuns says it’s hard to focus on their worship of God when loud music is thumping through the walls.
The Sisters of St. Charles Booromeo have filed a lawsuit against the Club Allure strip club, claiming the thumping music is disruptive. In addition, the nuns claim the establishment is in violation of state zoning laws that require adult oriented businesses to be more than 1,000 feet from a place of worship.
The nuns have been in their Stone Park, Illinois convent for 70 years.
The nuns also say that an abundance of immoral behavior has descended on the area since the opening of the club.
“Public violence, drunkenness and litter, including empty whiskey and beer bottles, discarded contraceptive packages and products and even used condoms evidencing illicit sexual misbehavior either in the club or about its environs,” the nuns claim in their lawsuit.
The nuns also say they are praying daily for God’s intervention in the case.
The Supreme Court handed down a unanimous decision in favor of a pro-life group that wanted to challenge an Ohio law that put them at risk for a lawsuit if someone felt their political ads were “false.”
The Susan B. Anthony List had sued a now-former Democratic U.S. Congressman who had claimed the group lied about him in a campaign ad that said he supported taxpayer funded abortion because of his support of the Affordable Care Act. While the Congressman dropped his complaint against the group under the Ohio law, the group sued to say the law was unconstitutional.
The group said that the lawsuit by former Rep. Steve Driehaus also violated the group’s freedom of speech. The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled the group had no standing to pursue a lawsuit because the suit against them had been dropped after the election was over.
The ACLU, a very anti-life legal group, surprised observers by backing SBA List in the case.
“Speech is rarely black and white,” an ACLU spokesman said. “If the government silences one side of the debate, the public is less informed and others might be fearful of criticizing elected officials. The answer to unpopular speech is not less, but more speech.”
Anti-life groups said the case is about the “right to lie” despite the fact the SBA List has shown the Affordable Care Act includes multiple abortion funding provisions.
The Supreme Court declined in a 7-2 decision to hear the appeal of a school district that held their graduation ceremonies inside a church building, allowing a lower court ruling to stand that holding such an event inside a church is unconstitutional.
The anti-Christian group Americans United for Separation of Church and State filed a lawsuit in 1990 against the Elmbrook, Wisconsin School District which had been holding their graduation ceremonies inside a non-denominational church facility. The anti-Christianists said the mere existence of Christian symbols in the building meant the school was promoting Christianity over all other religions.
While multiple lower courts ruled in favor of the school district, the anti-Christian group continued to file appeals until the full 7th Circuit Court of Appeals overruled a three-judge 7th Circuit panel and ruled in their favor. The Supreme Court before their formal refusal to hear the case shelved the case for two years.
Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas dissented from the majority. Justice Scalia wrote that while a school district may have to act to soothe angry people, it doesn’t mean it’s the constitution’s job to soothe hurt feelings. The justices also noted the flawed 7th Circuit ruling was in conflict with the Supreme Court’s decision in Town of Greece v. Galloway, which stated that mere offense does not equate to coercion.
A federal court has sided with a Christian student who challenged his school’s rules that he could not preach on the campus without prior approval of the administration.
The ruling says that the outdoor areas of the Virginia Community College System as “venues for free expression” and that the school is prohibited from enforcing “speech zones” which would be the only places students could express their views.
The school system has announced they are going to comply with the ruling and change their rules.
“Colleges should support, not censor, student speech,” Alliance Defending Freedom lawyer Travis Barham said. “We comment the Virginia Community College System for revising its speech policy to align with what a marketplace of ideas should be.”
The previous policy said that no student could make public speeches on campus except in designated areas, and only if they were members of student groups approved by the school and had their message cleared four days in advance. Christian Parks filed suit after he was twice prevented from preaching last fall in the school’s public courtyard.
Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring had decided not to defend the policy in court.
A number of residents and students protested at the offices of the Ector County (Texas) Independent School District after officials said they would be making prayer in the graduation ceremony optional.
High school students in the district had voted to have prayer as part of the ceremony but the administrators completely ignored their wishes in scheduling an “opening” and “closing” delivered by students instead of an invocation and benediction. The students would not be chosen by the graduating seniors or by academic achievement but entirely by random selection.
The move came because the anti-Christian group Americans United for the Separation of Church and State threatened to sue the school if they allowed the students to follow through on their vote to have a prayer included in the event.
Students held up signs saying “We are a democracy; we voted to pray” and “As Americans, we have the freedom to pray.”
School board member Doyle Woodall said that the board did not want to take the action they did but that it was forced upon them by anti-Christianists using the courts to force their will on the majority.