Share This Page

Constitutionality of law challenged in Ohio beard-cutting case

In an effort to end an Amish debearding case before trial, lawyers for a dissident Ohio group and its leader want a judge to find the federal hate-crimes law unconstitutional based, in part, on religious grounds.

"If the court agrees, perhaps a remedy would be that this case would go away," J. Dean Carro, a defense lawyer in the case and law professor at the University of Akron, said on Tuesday.

In a motion filed pm Monday, the defense asked U.S. District Judge Dan A. Polster of Cleveland to dismiss charges against Samuel Mullet Sr., 66; his nephew, Lester Mullet, 37; and 10 others. Their request is based, among other things, on grounds that the Hate Crimes Prevention Act cannot be applied to "religious activity under the First Amendment, and specifically, as to actions between private parties within the same religion."

Carro represents Lester Mullet. Sam Mullet is represented by federal public defender Wendi Overmyer, who could not be reached.

In December, a federal grand jury indicted Sam Mullet and 16 other members of his Amish community outside Bergholz, Ohio, about 60 miles west of Pittsburgh, in at least four beard- and hair-cutting attacks. Prosecutors claim the attacks were intended as revenge on mainstream Old Order Amish who previously tried to excommunicate Sam Mullet for his unorthodox behavior.

Federal prosecutors had no comment "beyond the fact that we have every confidence that the law is constitutional," said Michael Tobin, spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office in Cleveland.

Charles Haynes, a Washington-based religious freedoms expert with the First Amendment Center, said he knows of no other constitutional challenges to the hate-crimes statutes citing religious protections under the First Amendment.

"It sounds to me like this is a pretty big stretch, but you never know what a court might do," Haynes said. "I'm not sure religious protections extend to alleged crimes."

Hate crimes prosecuted so far under the law have been race-related, not inter-religious disputes between private parties, defense attorneys noted in their filing.

"I don't know of any cases like this," Carro said. "As far as our research, there are no others."

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.