Over the past two years the
towns of and surrounding Jackson, New Jersey has experienced a growth in the
size of the Orthodox Jewish community, creating new tensions with the changing culture of the
towns. A number of complaints were filed over prayer services. Back in June
2016, the Council Vice President, serving as council president at the time,
notified the code compliance supervisor noting “14 cars in the driveway” of
Isaac Twail’s home.
Isaac Twail, resident of Pitney
Lane, located in Jackson, New Jersey filed a lawsuit in mid-January. Twail, an
Orthodox Jew, was the subject of a stake out urged by a township council
member. He alleges that the Council Vice President prompted town code
enforcement officers to observe Sabbath prayer services at his home on Friday
nights. Twail described this activity as harassment, claiming the presence of
the officers had a “chilling effect, [and] was intimidating.”
The services at his home lasted about one hour on Friday, about two and a half hours on Saturday mornings, and about twenty minutes on Saturday evenings. However, on the Sabbath, Orthodox Jewish law prohibits the operation of machinery and turning on or off electricity, such as driving a car. Since many Jews in Jackson do not live within walking distance of the synagogues, services are held at individual homes, like Isaac Twail, explaining the large amounts of cars parked outside his home.
According to public records, the above-mentioned stakeouts were routinely criticized or outright discouraged. There were no volitions at Twail’s home, and the large groups of people did not gather on a regular basis. In addition to no code violation for maximum occupancy, there were also no noise complaints filed.
Isaac Twail was being denied his right to pray at his home by the actions of Jackson Township code enforcement—a clear infringement on his free exercise rights as granted in the First Amendment of the Constitution.
The services at his home lasted about one hour on Friday, about two and a half hours on Saturday mornings, and about twenty minutes on Saturday evenings. However, on the Sabbath, Orthodox Jewish law prohibits the operation of machinery and turning on or off electricity, such as driving a car. Since many Jews in Jackson do not live within walking distance of the synagogues, services are held at individual homes, like Isaac Twail, explaining the large amounts of cars parked outside his home.
According to public records, the above-mentioned stakeouts were routinely criticized or outright discouraged. There were no volitions at Twail’s home, and the large groups of people did not gather on a regular basis. In addition to no code violation for maximum occupancy, there were also no noise complaints filed.
Isaac Twail was being denied his right to pray at his home by the actions of Jackson Township code enforcement—a clear infringement on his free exercise rights as granted in the First Amendment of the Constitution.
Considering there were no violations of any sort, I do not think
the township had any business being in, around, or outside Isaac Twail’s home,
especially while Sabbath services were being conducted. Additionally, with no
reported noise complaints, Twail and those attending his services were not
disturbing the surrounding community, or bringing attention to themselves or
their practices; they were simply observing the Sabbath as Orthodox Jewish laws
suggests. Having law enforcement observe these services, to the point where
Twail reports feeling intimidated is in clear violation of the First Amendment.
What are your thoughts on the stake out at Isaac Twail’s home during Sabbath services? Should code enforcement officers have the right to excersise such practices, even with no given violations?
What are your thoughts on the stake out at Isaac Twail’s home during Sabbath services? Should code enforcement officers have the right to excersise such practices, even with no given violations?
6 comments:
As I was looking up this case after reading your blog post, I also came across an article about the Jackson Township Council President Ken Bressi proposing a township wide ban on dormitories in the town back in March of 2017. In nearby Lakewood Township, many college students attend Beth Medrash Govoha, one of the world's largest Orthodox Jewish Yeshivas, and stay in dormitories. Bressi defends his proposal by stating this is an effort to "preserve our current suburban culture," however many Jewish members of the community feel that the specific ban of dormitories is intended to prevent students from attending Jewish colleges. I thought this was interesting considering how the officers you discuss in this post also seem to be targeting Orthodox Jews specifically. I, like you, agree that with no noise complaints or code violations, Twill and other members of the community have the right to practice their religion in a private home and code violation officers have no right to observe or supervise their prayer services (unless there were noice complaints/ violations).
I agree with both assessments because of the lack of violations of any laws or ordinances in the community. The biggest issue is the targeting of a specific religious group. When looking at violations of the First Amendment one of the main requirements is to main neutral and in this instance there is clearly little neutrality.
I agree with your assessment of the case, as well as the comments already posted. I think there is no basis for the police essentially harassing this man because of his religious beliefs and trying to interfere with his free exercise of religion. I think the point brought up by Jill gives even further context that they are purposely targeting a religion in order to maintain what they deem to be a desirable society.
Usually the concern about limiting practices is when they run up against the law, and it needs to be determined if the law was targeting the practicing group. In this case there are no laws against anything the plaintiffs are doing, it is clear government (the code counsel and police) infringement on the free exercise of the plaintiff’s religion.
I agree with the assessment of the case provided, and the additional article and facts that Jili talked about are increasingly interesting as well. I am curious, and a bit confused, on the precedence that this case stands upon, however. How can the neighbors complain that there are cars in the driveway? Is that not the private property of the homeowner, in which case the neighbors do not have a say in the appearance or maintenance of, particularly with no additional noise complaints or disturbances? With this train of thought, I would contest that it is in fact largely due to discrimination against the religion in which case is completely unconstitutional.
I agree that the code counsel and other authorities are clearly in the wrong and hold no right to continually harass the Orthodox Jewish Community of the township. However, I do question the degree with which the free exercise clause is violated. While I do believe that harassment of this nature does violate the free exercise clause by means of intimidation, the code counsel is not forcibly preventing the free exercise of these religious practices and the absence of coercion makes this a tricky topic.
Post a Comment