Post Reply
Switch to Forum Live View Amici curiae, Reform Bahai Faith
3 years ago  ::  Apr 08, 2011 - 10:27AM #1
Reformbahai
Posts: 31

Amici curiae, Reform Bahai Faith 
www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/USDist...


7th Circuit Court of Appeals Judges hammer NSA's attorney 2-20-09
www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/USCour...




November 23, 2010 >>> Opinion Handed Down by US 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, Case No. 08-2306
www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/US_7th...




US District Court of Northern Illinois rules against Haifan Baha'is
April 23, 2008

In the late 2006 nsa lawsuit against other Bahai denominations, the Reform Bahai Faith submitted three letters, given below, as amici curiae to Judge Amy J. St. Eve:

Here are highlights from both the April 23, 2008 Opinion and Motion. Further comments at bottom:

Original documents at Contempt Motion by Wilmette NSA
& Response by Orthodox Bahá'í Faith
trueseeker.typepad.com/true_seeker/court... 

139-opinion.pdf 


140-judgment.pdf 


"[T]he chain of successorship lacks a link," wrote the Honorable Amy J. St Eve, United States District Court Judge, in her Judgment in favor of theChicago_trial_january_7_2008_006 Orthodox Bahai Faith and the Baha'i Publishers Under the Provisions of the Covenant. The Court ruled on April 23, 2008 after holding an evidentiary hearing last January 7, 2008 in Chicago, Illinois on the contempt motion brought by the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States (Wilmette NSA).

In her decision, the Court stated that: "the vast weight of the record (including credible testimony) reflects that there was a significant doctrinal rift on a critical tenet of each group's faith, and that the PNBC's membership varied materially from that of the NSA-UHG. The record further reflects a demonstrable lack of intent to violate the injunction, and that the PNBC was not created to avoid the effect of the injunction. Simply put, there is no substantial continuity between the NSA-UHG and the PNBC, and, as a result, Mr. Schlatter, Mr. Marangella, and the PNBC have not violated the injunction."


Excerpts:

p: 12
II. Application To The Court's Findings of Fact Applying the above-stated principles here, none of the Alleged Contemnors is in privity with the bound entity, and thus none has violated the injunction. In rendering this finding, the Court has carefully and deliberately weighed all of the evidence adduced at the hearing and otherwise submitted by the parties. The Court closely assessed the demeanor of each testifying witness, including his or her body language, tone of voice, facial expressions, mannerisms, and other factors indicative of credibility.

p. 27
Rather, the vast weight of the record (including credible testimony) reflects that there was a significant doctrinal rift on a critical tenet of each group's faith, and that the PNBC's membership varied materially from that of the NSA-UHG. The record further reflects a demonstrable lack of intent to violate the injunction, and that the PNBC was not created to avoid the effect of the injunction. Simply put, there is no substantial continuity between the NSA-UHG and the PNBC, and, as a result, Mr. Schlatter, Mr. Marangella, and the PNBC have not violated the injunction.

p. 31
After considering the full record in this case, the Court finds that SIBC and the BPUPC are not in privity with the NSA-UHG....

p. 32
CONCLUSION
For the above reasons, the Court finds that the Alleged Contemnors are not in privity with the NSA-UHG and, in turn, that they are not in contempt of the injunction.

Judge Amy J. St. Eve
April 23, 2008


--


Reform Bahai Faith Letters to Judge Amy J. St. Eve in CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER


 


March 8, 2007

The Honorable Amy J. St. Eve
United States District Court
Northern District of Illinois
Courtroom 1241, Chambers 1260
Everett McKinley Dirksen Federal Building
219 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604

Re: Civil Action No. 64 C 1878

Dear Judge St. Eve:

As amici curiae, members of the Reform Bahai Faith are concerned about the impact of the present lawsuit upon our denomination, though differing in view from all named parties. Religious liberty is not only involved but is the issue before the Court. [nsa-memo.pdf for the lie made before the court that "No question of religious liberty is involved," page 2.]

While all named parties essentially differ over their interpretation of the purported will and testament of Abdul-Baha, members of the Reform Bahai Faith agree with the 1929 opinion of Bahai Ruth White and the 1930 Report of Dr. Charles Ainsworth Mitchell that the will is a fraudulent document.

Dr. Mitchell was a leading forensic researcher of the time at the British Museum and his work is still cited in academic sources. His Report is deposited with the Library of Congress (LC Control No.: mm 81000871) and a recently obtained certified copy is herewith provided to the Court.

The key passage of Dr. Mitchell’s Report, on the last page, second to the last paragraph, reads, “A  minute comparison of the authenticated writing with the writing on every page of the alleged will . . . has failed to detect in any part of the will the characteristics of the writing of Abdu’l-Baha, as shown in the authenticated specimens.”

Respectfully,

The Reform Bahai Faith
95 Theses - On Bahai Liberty
www.ReformBahai.org 

[original certified copy enclosed to Judge Amy St. Eve]

A SCANNED COPY of Dr. Mitchell's certified Report may be examined at the link below:


Dr. C. (Charles) Ainsworth Mitchell - Certified Copy from the Library of Congress
Report on the Writing Shown on the Photographs of the Alleged Will of Abdul-Baha. 1930.
www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/CAMitc...


 


--


June 18, 2007

The Honorable Amy J. St. Eve
United States District Court
Northern District of Illinois
Courtroom 1241, Chambers 1260
Everett McKinley Dirksen Federal Building
219 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604

Re: Civil Action No. 64 C 1878

Dear Judge St. Eve:

As amici curiae, members of the Reform Bahai Faith are very concerned about the impact of this lawsuit upon our denomination.

The lawyer [delete] has reported to us that the nsa of the Haifan Baha'i denomination has claimed in Court that the Reform Bahai Faith does not exist. I am writing to inform you that there are approximately [delete] members of the Reform Bahai Faith, most of whom are citizens of the United States of America. The Reform Bahai Press is a legally registered entity in Oakland County, Michigan and will publish its first book in 2008.

As mentioned in my March 8, 2007 amici curiae letter to you, while members of the Reform Bahai Faith believe the will and testament of Abdul-Baha was a fraudulent document, the Reform Bahai Faith looks to the beginning of our denomination in the numerous books and writings of Ruth White, Julie Chanler, and Mirza Ahmad Sohrab, from 1928 through the 1950s. The latter two were both described in New York Times obituaries as members of the Reform Bahai Movement, and I herewith provide documentation.

In our view, the nsa of the Haifan Baha'i denomination is hiding behind and using, indeed manipulating corporate law to conduct what is essentially a doctrinal struggle with the several Bahai denominations that have evolved and have existed since as early as 1928 in the case of Ruth White. The nsa has done this repeatedly through the US courts and legal system: in 1928 through misrepresentation and fraud it copyrighted and trademarked the word Bahai; in 1941, it sued unsuccessfully Chanler and Sohrab twice; it sued Mason Remey in 1966 but he was reportedly too old and feeble to show up and defend himself being out of the country; it is now attempting to use the US District Court of Northern Illinois to silence the several active and existing Bahai denominations with which it differs on religious doctrine and interpretation. For decades, in and out of the courts, the nsa has used such reprehensible tactics as slander, ad hominem, shunning, and intimidation, and the like, to muzzle and discredit dissenters and other denominations.

We ask the Court to protect both our Constitutional right to religious freedom and conscience and to protect us from having to choose between our loyalty to our government and legal system and the integrity of our beliefs. Though small in number from our beginning in 2004, we are sincere in our religious convictions, and ask the Court to protect our right to grow and develop unharassed by those who under the guise of corporate law seek to destroy us.

Respectfully,

The Reform Bahai Faith
95 Theses - On Bahai Liberty
www.ReformBahai.org

Mirza Ahamd Sohrab died Apr 20, 1958. In his obituary he is described as "leader of the Reform Bahá'í Movement in the United States". The New York Times, Apr 22, 1958; p. 33 "Obituary."
New York Times Preview attached as documentation:
select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res... 
Wikipedia biography:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirza_Ahmad_Sohrab 

Julie Olin Chanler. She died on March 11, 1961, in her obituary she was described as "spiritual leader of the Reform Baha'i movement...." The New York Times, Mar 12, 1961; pg 86. Her husband was Lewis Stuyvesant Chanler, an ex-Lieutenant Governor of New York (1907-08) and a former Democratic candidate for Governor.
Wikipedia biography:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julia_Lynch_Olin 

--


January 7, 2008

Re: Civil Action No. 64 C 1878

The Honorable Amy J. St. Eve
United States District Court
Northern District of Illinois
Courtroom 1241, Chambers 1260
Everett McKinley Dirksen Federal Building
219 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604

Dear Judge St. Eve:

The Reform Bahai Faith submits to the Court that the NSA of Wilmette, while publicly hiding behind a facade of liberalism, is essentially practicing Islamic "takfir," in the words of the scholar of Islam Bernard Lewis, "recognizing and denouncing apostasy," labeling people "kafir" or infidels, and issuing "fatwas" or decrees, denying the very existence of other Bahais and denominations, all indicative of the worst in the Shiite Islamic heritage of the Bahai Faith-practices Baha'u'llah specifically rejected, teaching tolerance of different religious views congruent with modern Western custom and practice. Nothing could be more diametrically opposed to the democracy of our civic and legal order. The NSA of Wilmette is essentially seeking to use the Court in a type of jihad.

Although the Reform Bahai Faith is not a party to Civil Action No. 64 C 1878, we have knowledge of what we believe are malicious and slanderous misrepresentations made to the Court on behalf of the NSA of Wilmette in Document 49-2:

"14. The Web site at 'reformbahai.org' is the site of an outspoken critic of NSA named Frederick Glaysher. While the Web site gives the impression that an organization is associated with Mr. Glaysher, there is no such organization. On information and belief, Mr. Glaysher's claims are simply not taken seriously by any one. The Web site is merely a stage, in a comer of the Web, for Mr. Glaysher's unusual fixation upon, and animus toward, NSA. This, of course, is not evidence of a Baha'i Faith denomination. The attached affidavit of Tracey Giertz indicates there was no content at this site until September 3, 2004. See id at ¶ 18."

The NSA of Wilmette offers the Court no "information" but ad hominem and slanderous vilification, which it has routinely used against other Bahai denominations since as early as the 1930s. Tracey Giertz, in her affidavit ends with Paragraph 16, making no mention of the Reform Bahai Faith or www.reformbahai.org, only the Free Bahais. Neither I nor the Reform Bahai Faith has ever had any interest in, or ownership of, the Free Bahais and their website. Nor have I or the Reform Bahai Faith ever been involved in any way with the Unitarian Bahais and their website. Our website was available online beginning August 19, 2004. By chance, the Reform Bahai website is registered through the same registration service as the Free Bahais, GoDaddy.com, one of the least expensive, used by over 25 million people, and which protects personal information from identity thieves. The Archive service Tracey Giertz used often takes a week or two to find and document new websites.

With approximately [deleted] members, most of whom are US citizens, Reform Bahais indeed do exist and are actively seeking to grow and develop in accordance with the rights and obligations of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. The NSA is seeking to use the ruling of a US Court against Bahai denominations who hold other religious opinions and thereby prohibit the "free exercise"of their and our First Amendment rights.

I also wish to inform the Court that the Reform Bahai Press has just published its first book of Bahai writings, The Universal Principles of the Reform Bahai Faith, available for sale throughout the country and much of the world since December 14, 2007. I have enclosed a copy of the book for the Court as further evidence of our existence as a growing, independent Bahai denomination.

The Reform Bahai Faith does not use either an apostrophe nor diacritical marks in the generic word Bahai, a spelling widely used in the USA since as early as 1900.

The Reform Bahai Faith emphatically presents before the Court the fact that it does not look to other Bahai denominations for its understanding of the Teachings of Baha'u'llah, especially all those denominations who are named parties, all of which we believe are based upon a fraudulent will and testament, purporting to be that of Abdul-Baha, and which document gave birth to the fundamentalist religious organization that has initiated the lawsuit before the Court, pretending to be a mere corporation. We provided the Court with a certified copy from the Library of Congress of Dr. C. Ainsworth Mitchell's Report on the Writing Shown on the Photographs of the Alleged Will of Abdul-Baha on March 8, 2007.

The animus of the NSA of Wilmette against the Reform Bahai Faith stems, among those reasons already alluded to, from the fact that the Reform Bahai Faith does not believe in an eventual Bahai theocracy; but a separation of church and state; rejects the infallibility of any Bahai Universal House of Justice; accepts that women can serve at all elected levels, including someday on a properly elected Bahai Universal House of Justice, unlike the corrupt one now located in Haifa, Israel.

We draw the attention of the Court to twenty-six pages of selections from Mirza Ahmad Sohrab's Broken Silence: The Story of Today's Struggle for Religious Freedom (1942), documenting the attempts by the NSA of Wilmette to trademark and copyright the generic term Bahai in 1928, though Bahais of different belief already existed at that time in Ruth White and others; the 1941 case before Judge Valente of the New York Supreme Court, in New York County; both revealing the unmitigated viciousness that the NSA has directed in the past against American citizens who were Bahais holding different religious convictions. Available via the Internet, Excerpts regarding the 1941 New York Supreme Court Case before Judge Valente: 
www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/archiv... 

We again appeal to the Court to protect our Constitutional rights to religious freedom and liberty.

Most respectfully yours,

Reform Bahai Faith

Enclosure: The Universal Principles of the Reform Bahai Faith. Reform Bahai Press, 2008. 148 pages.


 




 COMPARE the November 23, 2010 judgement:





November 23, 2010 - Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals rules against Haifan Baha'is of Wilmette, Illinois
Excerpts - Comments - Related Newspaper Articles - Opinion of US 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, Case No. 08-2306


Opinion, Judge Sykes, p 14-15: "Considered in light of these First Amendment limitations on the court’s authority, certain aspects of the 1966  injunction are troubling. The decree declares that “there is only one Baha’i Faith,” that Shoghi Effendi was its last Guardian and none has come since, and the National Spiritual  Assembly was its representative and “highest authority” in the United States and was “entitled to exclusive use of the  marks  and symbols of the Faith,” including the exclusive use of the word “Bahá’í.” Declarations of this sort push the  boundaries of the court’s authority under Kedroff and Presbyterian Church. In church property disputes (trademark suits  obviously qualify), the First Amendment limits the sphere in which civil courts may operate. When a district judge takes  sides in a religious schism, purports to decide matters of spiritual succession, and excludes dissenters from using the  name, symbols, and marks of the faith (as distinct from the name and marks of a church), the First Amendment line  appears to have been crossed" (boldface added).




Opinion of US 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, Case No. 08-2306 - November 23, 2010
www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/US_7th...


Baha'i Faith & 7th Circuit Court of Appeals
bahaifaith7thcircuitcourtofappeals.blogs...


Quick Reply
Cancel
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook