This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A court in Virginia has struck down a censorship scheme adopted by the state real estate board that banned references to an agent’s Christian faith in her emails and other communications, her ads, and more.
”The court finds the portion of Va. Code Ann. § 36-96.3(A)(3) presuming unlawful animus due to the mere use of words or symbols associated with a particular religion, national origin, sex, or race to be an unconstitutional abridgment of the rights to speech and expression established by the First Amendment,” the ruling said.
It is the American Center for Law and Justice that announced the result of a battle it waged on behalf of Hadassah Carter.
She had been attacked by the Virginia Real Estate Board “for including Bible verses on her website and phrases like ‘Jesus Loves You’ or John 3:16 in her email signatures,” the ACLJ reported.
The state board originally filed a complaint against her, accusing her of violating Virginia’s fair housing statutes, “absurdly” stating that because “she used religious speech, she could make someone feel discriminated against,” the organization reported.
That despite the fact that “There were no actual complaints against Hadassah for any discrimination. She had a diverse clientele of Jews, Catholics, Muslims, Buddhists, Kenyans, and Vietnamese. Not a single allegation of religious discrimination or any discrimination was made against her.”
Officials then dropped their complaint against Carter, but forced her then-employer to agree to a program of spying on her, through a “review” of a random sample of websites and communications that “shall always include agent Hadassah Carter.”
”That is targeted and unconstitutional discrimination against a Christian realtor for exercising her religious free expression,” the ACLJ reported. Its subsequent lawsuit was over Carter’s free speech rights.
Its request of the court was for summary judgment, to rule that the state’s assumption that ‘words or symbols” are proof of intent to discriminate was unconstitutional.
This month, the Richmond Circuit Court of the Commonwealth of Virginia did just that.
The ruling said, “Having considered the historical context for the Commonwealth’s Fair Housing Law, the court now turns to Carter’s overbreadth challenge. The statutory presumption makes unlawful any expression of individual identity that references religion, national origin, sex, or race, without any evaluation of the substantive message conveyed in the expression. The ban on expression is total. Thus, under the VFHL, a reference to the biblical verse: ‘Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear,’ Ephesians 6:5, would be presumed to carry an unlawful discriminatory purpose, but so also would reference to a verse such as, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ Mark 12:31. All biblical references alike are presumed to convey the same invidious discriminatory animus. Even though the latter reference carries a message entirely consistent with the statute’s purpose of eliminating disparate treatment, it is considered just as unlawful as the former, on the sole basis that it contains ‘words associated with a particular religion.’”
The court found, “The Commonwealth’s response to the numerous instances whereby the presumption of animus could be triggered is that the suspected realtor could overcome the presumption by presenting their own evidence of contrary intent. (Transcript of Hearing at 64-65 (Dec. 21, 2023)). This proposed solution to the statute’s overbreadth misses the point. It is axiomatic that where the state alleges misconduct by its citizens, it is the state that bears the burden of proof. See Sutherland v. Commonwealth, 171 Va. 485, 494 (1938). The presumption in the VFHL relieves the Commonwealth of its burden and automatically penalizes the use of any and all words or symbols, even if they are entirely benign because they carry the stigma of merely being ‘associated’ with a particular religion, national origin, sex, or race.”
