No one should have to choose between going to church or going to jail

Jun 26, 2024

An atheist inmate whose parole officer punished him for not attending Christian worship services will receive over $100,000 in monetary damages as part of a settlement that will finally end the years-long saga.

(Follow above article link to view original article with photos/PDFs.)

The case dates back to 2015, when Mark Janny, an atheist, was released from jail. His parole officer, John Gamez, told Janny that if he wanted to remain out of prison, he would have to live at the Denver Rescue Mission, a Christian homeless shelter, because he needed a “residence of record.”

That shelter’s rules required residents to participate in worship services, Bible studies, and faith-based counseling, none of which Janny had any desire to join. And he shouldn’t have had to. The courts should never force anyone, much less an atheist, to attend a Christian anything as a requirement of parole.

Janny actually suggested an alternative: staying at the home of some family friends. That option was rejected, though, so Janny went to the shelter… but didn’t participate in the religious activities. Because he didn’t participate, he was kicked out of the shelter. Because he was kicked out of the shelter, Gamez revoked Janny’s parole and sent him back to jail.

When the Parole Board saw him a few weeks later, they agreed that Janny violated his parole for not having a place of residence and sent him back to jail for five more months.

In short: Janny was incarcerated unnecessarily all because he refused to participate in a Christian ministry.

Janny sued, but it didn’t go well. He represented himself in court (which didn’t help) and a district court eventually dismissed his case.

In June of 2020, the ACLU and Americans United for Separation of Church and State worked with Janny to appeal that decision, meaning they were putting the weight of their organizations behind his case. And that eventually paid off. In 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit overturned the dismissal of his case, 2-1, allowing him to pursue his lawsuit. He was finally on the path to go to trial.

To be clear, that didn’t mean his case was over. Far from it. The ruling simply allowed the case to move forward on the merits instead of being blocked from proceeding entirely. Without that decision, justice wasn’t even a possibility.

There was also an issue regarding who Janny could sue and whether certain people had qualified immunity. The district court had said earlier that the parole officer didn’t violate Janny’s First Amendment rights. But the appeals court overturned that decision, too, saying that if they let the immunity stand, it would violate the “basic right to be free from state-sponsored religious coercion.”

And now there’s finally some closure. Both parties have agreed to settle the case. Janny will walk away with $100,000 in damages along with his legal fees covered.

The two groups representing him celebrated the case’s dismissal:

Rachel K. Laser, CEO and president at Americans United: “This is a victory for Mark Janny and for religious freedom. Our country’s fundamental principle of church-state separation guarantees that everyone has the right to believe as they choose, so long as they don’t harm others. Jailing someone for refusing to attend worship services and to engage in Bible study is not religious freedom – it’s religious coercion.”

Daniel Mach, director of the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief: “The government presented Mr. Janny with an unconstitutional dilemma: Go to church, or go to jail. The First Amendment squarely prohibits such religious coercion, and we’re pleased that this settlement helps vindicate Mr. Janny’s religious liberty.”

It’s the correct ending but it’s absurd that this case ever got to this point.

No one should have to choose between church or jail. To make someone practice Christianity in order to avoid prison time is beyond unreasonable. Everyone involved in prolonging Janny’s imprisonment should be penalized for their actions... but at least in this case, the Colorado Department of Corrections saw the writing on the wall and opted to cut their losses before the case went to trial. That in itself is a huge victory.

(Portions of this article were published earlier)