Recently,
a condo association in Connecticut ordered Barbara Cadranel to take down her
mezuzah from her doorpost arguing that it violated the condo by-laws. A mezuzah is “a prayer scroll in a small
clear plastic case” that is attached to a doorpost of a Jewish home in
accordance with Jewish law. According to
the condo’s by-laws, decorations are allowed on doors—which are considered the
condo owner’s property—but not on doorposts—which are considered common
area. The condo association told
Cadranel that she must take down the mezuzah or be charged $50 a day that it
remains up. In this article, it does not
state the reason it is against the by-laws to have the mezuzah on the
doorpost. However, the article is framed
in a way to make it appear that the reason the mezuzah is not allowed is
because it is a religious symbol. It
states “video from inside the complex showed several common areas adorned with
Easter eggs and other Easter decorations.”
The only comment from the condo association is that only Cadranel’s side
of the story is being told, but the condo association would not explain their
side. The Anti-Defamation League has
agreed to help Cadranel during this situation.
An example of a mezuzah on a doorpost
As
I stated previously, it is not clear if the issue at hand is because the
mezuzah is a religious symbol, or because there is a rule not allowing anything on doorposts (possibly for fire
safety concerns?). If the issue is
because the mezuzah is a Jewish symbol, then no other religious symbols (such
as Easter decorations) should be allowed in common areas and Cadranel has a
fair complaint against the condo association.
However, if the reasoning for not allowing anything on doorposts is a
safety concern, then possibly the law hinders religion because hanging a
mezuzah is part of Jewish law. Should
exceptions be made for the mezuzah in this condo complex? The problem there then arises is when do
religious exceptions become preference to religion?
Should
this issue end up in court, I do not think I would be able to predict the
outcome of the case. On one hand, the
by-law was likely not written with religion in mind and was likely made for
safety reasons. The law is neutral in
that nothing is allowed on doorposts. However, as far as I know, only the Jewish
faith requires their members to put a
symbol on their doorpost. As such, even
if the rule was written neutrally, the only people that will be concerned about
the law are members of the Jewish faith.
The law unintentionally infringes on their practice. As well, the doorpost is considered a common
area and it appears that the issue is that residents are not allowed to hang
decorative items in the common area. If
this is the case, then charging Cadranel the $50 a day and not the other
residents that placed Easter decorations in the common area is privileging one
religion over another. Charging Cadranel
and not the others hinders Cadranel’s free exercise of her religion. Ultimately, I believe Cadranel should be able
to hang the mezuzah on her doorpost and an exception should be made in the
by-laws because hanging the mezuzah is not a choice but in accordance to Jewish
law. Otherwise Candranel could easily
make the case for the condo association preventing her from practicing her
religion.
4 comments:
This is a great blog topic in response to the readings we had this week. I am interested to see that like Lynch vs. Donnelly, the placement & situation of where the object is located is in question. While I agree with your statement about the law being neutral & if the Jewish community members must take down their mezuzah, then the easter decorations must too. The only issue that I question (along with the Lynch vs. Donnelly) is that "Christmas" and "Easter" have become "capitalistic. secular holidays" in my mind. With this, I question what would be the ruling in such cases if the Lemon Test was applied? Nonetheless, i am interested to see where this situation goes in the rulings.
I've followed this case with great interest. I was all set to favor the condo association -- until our readings this week. The Easter Egg display in the common area should make this a win for the condo owner. Why is this mezuzah is so big? A friend gave me a mezuzah that was much smller and posted it on the inside doorframe - and my condo association has similar rules about symbols. One could argue that the Easter Egg symbol is temporary while the mezuzah is a permanent one.
Its part of the whole tradition of that item to have it on the post. It would defeat its significance if it was anywhere else, just like a Christian wouldn't hang a crucifix upside down. It would change or detract from the meaning. The irony here is that the verses on the tiny scroll are also found in the bible so if it is Christians that is making the argument, I hope they do a little more research. I applaud the condo owner's faith and devotion. I think the association should revise their rules, because they have no right to single her out in this way. If her symbol is in a common area and must come down, then all the other displays should come down too.
Anne, if your question is in regards to the mezuzah in the picture I posted, I just did a Google search for a mezuzah for those not familiar with it. I don't know the size of the condo owner's in this case.
Post a Comment