News - Current News On Beliefnet

Friday July 11, 2008

Court Says Jews Have No Right to Mezuzahs in Condo Building

By Nicole Neroulias

Religion News Service

(RNS) A federal appeals court in Chicago has ruled that fair-housing laws do not extend to permitting a Jewish resident to nail a mezuzah to a door frame, prompting an outcry from the Jewish community.

The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 ruling on Thursday (July 10), decided the federal Fair Housing Act does not accommodate a resident's religious requirement to affix the Jewish emblem to a doorway, if the ban on hallway displays applies to everyone regardless of religious beliefs.

The case stems from the condominium association at Shoreline Towers, a Chicago housing complex, enforcing a rule in 2004 banning doormats, shoes, signs and other materials in the hallways.

The Bloch family sued after the repeated removal of their mezuzah -- small encased biblical scrolls that are nailed to the entrances of Jewish homes -- although the association later adopted a religious exception to the rule.

The Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America criticized the court's decision, and may appeal to Congress to amend the federal law, said the OU's Washington director, Nathan J. Diament.

"We believe that irrespective of the facial neutrality of the condo association's rule, that to ban a Jewish tenant from affixing a mezuzah ought to be viewed as a constructive eviction from their home and thus illegal under the Fair Housing Act," he said.

Congress may consider amending the law to accommodate mezuzahs and other religious necessities if lawmakers are convinced a ban results in Jews not being able to live in a residence, said Howard M. Friedman, a University of Toledo law professor whose Religion Clause blog follows church-state legal cases.

The Bloch family could also appeal to the Supreme Court, but it seems federal judges want to keep these cases in the hands of state and local authorities, he added.

They probably didn't want every dispute between a condo owner and condo boards going into federal court," Friedman said. "This ruling didn't say it was a good thing to have that kind of rule, but it just said that the federal Fair Housing Act doesn't say anything about it, so it should be dealt with by state law."

In the last three years, Chicago and Illinois lawmakers have adopted laws guaranteeing tenants' rights to affix religious symbols to their doors, preventing Shoreline Towers from reverting back to the original ban.

"In this particular case, the issue is moot now," Friedman said. "It may prompt other states to come up with their own laws, too."

Permalink email icon Email This Add to:

Comments

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mezuzah

I don't see a particular reason to ban the things; it's not like they're big or gaudy or anything. However, I don't know enough about law to really comment on the ruling, but if it were me owning the condo, I would let the Jews put them up.

God bless.

Posted by: Joey | July 11, 2008 4:44 PM

I suppose it's a slippery slope concern.

Posted by: nnmns | July 11, 2008 5:08 PM

We can't live someplace without them on the doorpost. It's in the bible.

The condo board knew this. The Jews will move. And they'll get a judenreinhaus - which is what I'm sure they wanted.

Posted by: Scott R. | July 11, 2008 6:50 PM

If your doorway is arched (no post or lintel) a mezuzah is not required. Maybe all housing open to the public should have such an architectural feature (that my p'sak and I'm sticking to it).

Posted by: sinsonte | July 11, 2008 7:23 PM

Some condo boards wheel way too much power, the effort to keep a person from individualizing or personalizing sometimes goes too far in condo settings.

Posted by: cknuck | July 11, 2008 7:58 PM

Shocker.... I agree with cknuck, that some condo boards have too much power. Somehow I don't think a small religious symbol on a doorframe is comparable to doormats, shoes,and signs...and other "materials."

Posted by: pagansister | July 11, 2008 9:09 PM

Sinsonite,

It doesn't matter anymore - all doors providing entry to a home must have a mezzuzah.

Posted by: Scott R. | July 11, 2008 10:58 PM

So nail it on the inside of the frame, already. There is no proscription that says it has to be on the outside only. For crying out loud, the original door frames had flaps and not solid wood doors. Oi, is this the most important thing people have to do? So maybe they need a mezuzah on the door that is the exit they usually use to get outside the whole building. Is it so hard to be creative instead of proscriptive? Such a building - I'd rather live in a tent!

Posted by: jestrfyl | July 12, 2008 12:04 AM

Tradition says it goes on the outside.

Yes, it is very important. It's a part of what makes us Jews. It is understood from the biblical passage that it be placed on the outside.

I wonder if that condo has a Xmas tree or a creche in the lobby. Xians threaten boycotts if salespeople don't say "Merry Xmas" or if creches don't go in the town square.

I think we can have 2-3 inch tablet on our door frame (have you ever seen how small a mezzuzah is?). I would think that you, who defends religious freedom, would understand that.

And now it is the most important thing for us to do, because the court is saying we aren't allowed to publicly practice our faith.

Posted by: Scott R. | July 12, 2008 12:21 AM

I sympathize with the smallness and I presume inconspicuousness of it but if they let them have that what if someone says his religion requires a door-sized cross? Or a dish of fresh spaghetti by the door?

If it's only tradition that says they go on the outside why not start an alternate tradition that it's ok on the inside of the door?

Posted by: nnmns | July 12, 2008 2:27 AM

Or possibly they could grant an exemption for any display no more than such and such dimensions that would allow the mezuzah's.

Posted by: nnmns | July 12, 2008 7:59 AM

I think an exemption would be in order. It's smaller than a pen, and just a tad wider. It's inconspicuous, and it you aren't looking for it, you probably won't notice it (except for the fiends who ripped ours down when I was a kid).

It's a 3,000 year old tradition. I think the spaghetti thing would be pretty current. And you know there are probably plenty of people that think a door-size cross is called for. Hell, if they can burn crosses into students' arms...:(

Posted by: Scott R. | July 12, 2008 10:11 AM

The article said in the last three years they have changed the condo laws at the condo that said they couldn't have religious symbols on their front doors to now being able to. When was the fair housing law changed to not being able to have religious Symbols on their doors? Things like rugs, and doormats, or anything you can fall over shouldn't be there, but personal decorations, or religious symbols aren't a hazzard, can't see what the problem is. People should be able to feel that where they live represents them in some way, and not just a number in long hallways.

Posted by: Henrietta22 | July 12, 2008 5:35 PM

Rabbis ruled "in times of persecution," the mezuzah (as well and the chanukiah) did not have to be displayed. I'm not saying these are the times of persecution, but if one is about to lose one's home, you might want to fudge a little.

Posted by: sinsonte | July 12, 2008 10:25 PM

One should not have to lose their home for practicing Judaism.

That, of course, would make this a time of persecution.

Not gonna back down on this. And I pray we push this right to the Supremes. This is a perfect case for an infringement on the practice of religion.

Posted by: Scott R. | July 13, 2008 10:43 AM

Why are you so against us practicing our faith?

Posted by: Scott R. | July 13, 2008 10:47 AM

This is the stupidist thing I've ever heard. I think that if you move into a place that has an HOA or the condo version of one and they get approval for such a ridiculous thing then you have to abide by it, religious or not. On the other hand, I often wonder what happens when housing without such restrictions becomes obscure and difficult to find.

I live next to the president of our HOA. I am a single mom living with another single mom. We share household responsibilities and feel safer living with eachother than we would living alone. Still, despite what seems perfectly sane and normal to us caused a stir with our neighbor. Even though we have the same amount of people in our home as the neighbors, she tried to end my living situation based on HOA rules. It was pathetic so I sympathise with the condo owners unable to follow their religious practices.

Posted by: Confessoressa | July 14, 2008 12:43 PM

Confessoressa,
You have experienced the prejudice that many people harbor against homosexuals. That ignorance prevents many people from making intelligent alternative arrangements in their lives. We need to extinguish the fires of prejudice and learn that all people have a right to live freely. Many of the new rules and laws also violate the rights of people who may not be in same gender emotional relationships. So we need to vote down or repeal these laws and honor the first line of the Declaraton of Independance.

Posted by: jestrfyl | July 14, 2008 3:12 PM

C, I second jestrfyl. It sure would be nicer if people let other people do what they need to, as long as they aren't hurting anyone.

Posted by: nnmns | July 14, 2008 7:49 PM

Thank you both. It's hard enough creating stability for our children without the added scrutiny by nosy neighbors. I have no doubt that this woman was motivated by her discrimination against homosexuals. We aren't gay but sometimes I wish we were; we get along better than either of us did with our spouses!

On a side note, we worked hard to endear ourselves to our neighbor and saw this as an opportunity to open minds, including gathering our children up to sing traditional Christmas carols to her with warm, winter wishes. It worked and the inquiries eventually died down. A year later, we happily wave to eachother as our lives crisscross.

Posted by: Confessoressa | July 15, 2008 10:53 AM

Am glad things have worked out for the good with your neighbor, Confessoressa. Makes life much better.

Posted by: pagansister | July 15, 2008 2:28 PM

Me too.

Posted by: nnmns | July 15, 2008 4:41 PM

A side note - elsewhere on B'net, someone posted that the decision has been overturned and the mezuzah is now being permitted.

Odd that no correction or update or another "news" story has appeared.

Posted by: recovering ex-Pentecostal | July 24, 2008 9:25 AM