PITTSBURGH – A non-denominational religious group is ready to settle federal claims it made that a Pennsylvania law was allegedly used by state officials to declare that it may not solemnize legal marriages in the Commonwealth.
Universal Life Church Monastery Storehouse of Seattle first filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on May 11, 2021 versus Michael McGeever, in his official capacity as Director of Court Records for Allegheny County, Pennsylvania; and Patricia Capozoli, in her official capacity as Wills and Orphans’ Court Division Manager for Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, both of Pittsburgh.
“ULC Monastery is a non-denominational religious organization that champions religious freedom, social justice, and spiritual expression of all kinds. Its ecclesiastical belief system is derived from the fundamental belief that we are all children of the same universe. To further its mission, ULC Monastery ordains those who feel called to be a minister of the Church, and many who receive ordination choose to minister by officiating weddings,” the suit said.
“Pennsylvania law authorizes ‘A minister, priest or rabbi of any regularly established church or congregation’ to solemnize marriages. Defendants are responsible for the issuance and recording of marriage licenses and certificates in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. Defendants have used the powers of their office to proclaim that ministers of ULC Monastery may not solemnize legal marriages. The intent and impact of this practice is to discourage ULC Monastery ministers from exercising rights afforded to ministers of other churches and religions.”
The complaint contained five accounts from various ULC ministers, who all allege that they were not permitted to officiate at wedding ceremonies in Pennsylvania and that when contacting state officials in both of the defendant’s offices, were told that the state would not recognize a ceremony that they presided over.
According to the plaintiffs, these actions violated both the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
“Defendants’ apparent policy of discrimination unconstitutionally prefers certain religions or religious denominations over others and burdens ULC Monastery’s and its ministers’ free exercise of religion. To the extent defendants are correct that 23 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. Section 1503 bars ULC Monastery ministers from solemnizing marriages while granting that benefit to ministers of other religious denominations, the statute is unconstitutional,” per the suit.
The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the case in its entirety with prejudice on July 7, 2021, arguing that there is no actual controversy between the parties and the plaintiff did not plead a Monell claim necessary to establish liability under Section 1983.
“Here, ULC Monastery only pleads what can be described as speculative injuries on behalf of five of its reverends. All five of the reverends decided on their own not to officiate certain ceremonies based on a conjectural concern that the marriage would be deemed invalid. There are no facts in the complaint alleging that a marriage ceremony performed by a ULC Monastery officiant has been deemed invalid by Allegheny County defendants,” the dismissal motion stated.
“There are no facts in the complaint asserting that Allegheny County defendants refused to issue a marriage license to any couple seeking to be married by a ULC Monastery officiant. There are no facts in the complaint asserting that Allegheny County defendants refused to record marriage certificates signed by a ULC Monastery officiant. Thus, such a claim is not ripe for adjudication.”
Additionally, the defendants say the plaintiff did not show a Monell violation and did not identify a policy by which Allegheny County committed said violation.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania Judge J. Nicholas Ranjan denied the defense’s dismissal motion on Jan. 25.
“First, a live case or controversy exists. Universal has alleged that its ministers are being singled out as ‘illegitimate’ and unworthy of solemnizing marriages in the Commonwealth. According to Universal, this ‘singling out’ has chilled the exercise of its ministers’ First Amendment rights. This harm is ongoing and exists whether defendants’ offices, in fact, refuse to issue licenses for marriages performed by Universal’s ministers,” Ranjan said.
“Second, Monell does not apply. That’s because Universal is bringing claims against defendants as state officials administering Pennsylvania’s marriage statutes. Monell applies only to claims for municipal liability.”
Ranjan stated that “whether there is a risk of invalidation of a marriage is unnecessary for there to be a justiciable controversy” and there was in fact such a controversy because “Universal’s ministers were expressly told that they could not solemnize marriage ceremonies, thereby chilling their First Amendment rights.”
“In sum, Universal has alleged that its ministers have lost faith in their ordination, remain hesitant to solemnize marriages, and face the indignity of being singled out based on their religion. These injuries are not speculative; they have occurred and continue to occur. This case therefore presents a live controversy,” Ranjan said.
Defendants Capozoli and McGeever denied the plaintiff’s claims in a Feb. 8 answer, finding them to be conclusions of law requiring no response and presenting 17 affirmative defenses.
UPDATE
A joint stipulation and proposed order for entry of final judgment was filed on June 3, which would see the action and settled and dismissed with prejudice.
“The undersigned parties, by and through their counsel of record, have agreed to a settlement and hereby conditionally stipulate to the dismissal of this action with prejudice. As a condition to the settlement agreement, the parties jointly stipulate that the Court will enter final judgment in this action without making any determination as to liability of defendants,” per the stipulation.
“Defendants McGeever and Capozoli in their official capacities, have denied and continue to deny any and all liability for any unlawful action claimed by plaintiff Universal Life Church Monastery Storehouse in this lawsuit. Plaintiff ULCMS agrees and acknowledges that this joint stipulation and proposed order for entry of final judgment shall not constitute or be construed as an admission of liability by defendants or as a statement of admission of any wrongdoing or violation by defendants of any federal or state statute or Allegheny County policy.”
The proposed settlement provides that the defendants “shall ensure that their training materials instruct employees and agents that they are not to interpret the meaning of 23 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. Section 1503(a)(6) and “shall ensure that their employees and agents are trained and directed accordingly to not deny, discourage, or chill the Universal Life Church’s religious practice, specifically by not communicating to members of the public that a Universal Life Church minister cannot lawfully solemnize a marriage solely on the basis of the minister’s affiliation and/or ordination with the Universal Life Church.”
The plaintiff is represented by Patrick K. Cavanaugh, Zachary N. Gordon, Ambika Kumar, Bruce Edward Johnson and Adam Sieff of Del Sole Cavanaugh Stroyd, in Pittsburgh, Seattle, Wash. and Los Angeles, Calif.
The defendants are represented by Frances M. Liebenguth of the Allegheny County Solicitor’s Office, also in Pittsburgh.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania case 2:21-cv-00618
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com