Latest Legal News
 

Prison Ministries Face Danger from Activist Judges

Prison Fellowship Ministries, begun by Chuck Colson, is known for their success in transforming lives.
However, after a recent court ruling, the future of one of its most successful ministries is endangered. The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, with former Justice O’Connor on the three judge panel, wrongly ruled this past week that prison ministries that advance a Christian doctrine are unqualified to receive government funds.

The liberal group Americans United for Separation of Church and State sued Prison Fellowship’s InnerChange Initiative for $1.5 million that they claimed should be paid back to the State. Despite the program being voluntary for prisoners and 70% of the cost being paid by Prison Fellowship to help rehabilitate the lives of criminals before they are released into society, Americans United aimed to ban InnerChange Initiative from operating in Iowa. The Appeals Court found the program unconstitutional, but rejected the claim asking Prison Fellowship to pay $1.5 million. InnerChange, will continue its ministry in Iowa—only totally with private funds.

If this decision is not overturned, expect an attack on the future program as well. If the appeals court decision is upheld, prison ministries and all kinds of faith-based initiatives across the United States could be hindered and even shut down. InnerChange itself is a program that began in Texas under then Governor George Bush. When Bush became President, opponents tried to attack the state based program in a legal battle. Free Market’s legal division represented the faith based ministry, the Attorney General represented the State, and the case was thrown out of court. Free Market will again do all it can to make sure that prison fellowships can continue to serve without discrimination from activist judges.

Supreme Court Decides to Hear Case on 2nd Amendment, Right to Bear Arms

In breaking news, the Supreme Court just accepted a landmark case that will determine if the 2nd Amendment gives individuals the right to bear arms. This case will clarify a broiling debate that dates back to our Founding Fathers intent in putting the 2nd Amendment in the United States Constitution.

Does the right to bear arms only apply to militias or is it to allow individuals to protect themselves and their property? In District of Columbia v Heller, residents of D.C. are challenging the D.C. laws that prohibit individuals from owning and using guns.

The Supreme Court has granted cert. limited to the following question: Do the D.C. laws “violate the 2nd Amendment rights of individuals who are not affiliated with a state-regulated militia but who wish to keep handguns and other firearms for private use in their homes?"