The Satanic Temple Inc: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
x>Abaddon Despoiler (Fixed case number and added citation) |
x>Abaddon Despoiler (added "file date" and Belle Plaine Lawsuit) |
||
| Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
==Lawsuits== | ==Lawsuits== | ||
The Satanic Temple Inc. has been involved in at least | The Satanic Temple Inc. has been involved in at least four [[lawsuits]] since its formation. | ||
{| class="article-table" | {| class="article-table" | ||
|+Court Cases | |+Court Cases | ||
!Filed | |||
!Case name | !Case name | ||
!Original Jurisdiction | !Original Jurisdiction | ||
| Line 47: | Line 48: | ||
!Appeal | !Appeal | ||
|- | |- | ||
|02/04/2021 | |||
|[[Satanic Temple, The v. Belle Plaine, City of]] | |||
|US District Court for the District of Minnesota | |||
|[https://dockets.justia.com/docket/minnesota/mndce/0:2021cv00336/192453 0:2021cv00336] | |||
|Ongoing | |||
| | |||
|- | |||
|1/20/2021 | |||
|[[The Satanic Temple, Inc. v. City of Boston]] | |[[The Satanic Temple, Inc. v. City of Boston]] | ||
| | |US District Court of Massachusetts - Boston | ||
|[https://dockets.justia.com/docket/massachusetts/madce/1:2021cv10102/229706 1:21-cv-10102] | |[https://dockets.justia.com/docket/massachusetts/madce/1:2021cv10102/229706 1:21-cv-10102] | ||
|Ongoing | |Ongoing | ||
| | | | ||
|- | |- | ||
|9/27/2020 | |||
|[[The Satanic Temple, Inc. v. Lamar Advertising of Louisiana, LLC]] | |[[The Satanic Temple, Inc. v. Lamar Advertising of Louisiana, LLC]] | ||
|Circuit Court | |19th West Circuit Court 5 (Benton County, Ark.) | ||
|04CV-20-2100 | |[https://caseinfo.arcourts.gov/cconnect/PROD/public/ck_public_qry_doct.cp_dktrpt_frames?backto=C&case_id=04CV-20-2100&begin_date=&end_date= 04CV-20-2100] | ||
|Ongoing | |Ongoing | ||
| | | | ||
|- | |- | ||
|2/26/2018 | |||
|[[The Satanic Temple, Inc., et al v. City of Scottsdale]] | |[[The Satanic Temple, Inc., et al v. City of Scottsdale]] | ||
| | |US District Court of Arizona - Phoenix | ||
|[https://dockets.justia.com/docket/arizona/azdce/2:2018cv00621/1082663 2:2018cv00621] | |[https://dockets.justia.com/docket/arizona/azdce/2:2018cv00621/1082663 2:2018cv00621] | ||
|Failed<ref>''A U.S. District Court judge ruled this month that Scottsdale did not discriminate against the Satanic Temple when the city blocked a member of the group from giving an invocation before a City Council meeting in 2016.'' | |Failed<ref>''A U.S. District Court judge ruled this month that Scottsdale did not discriminate against the Satanic Temple when the city blocked a member of the group from giving an invocation before a City Council meeting in 2016.'' | ||
| Line 67: | Line 78: | ||
[https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/scottsdale/2020/02/29/scottsdale-wins-court-battle-against-satanists-over-invocation/4903564002/ Scottsdale wins court battle against Satanists over right to give invocation; Satanists appeal, Arizona Republic], Feb. 29, 2020 [https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:CLRu82vyyIgJ:https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/scottsdale/2020/02/29/scottsdale-wins-court-battle-against-satanists-over-invocation/4903564002/+&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us Cached]</ref> | [https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/scottsdale/2020/02/29/scottsdale-wins-court-battle-against-satanists-over-invocation/4903564002/ Scottsdale wins court battle against Satanists over right to give invocation; Satanists appeal, Arizona Republic], Feb. 29, 2020 [https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:CLRu82vyyIgJ:https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/scottsdale/2020/02/29/scottsdale-wins-court-battle-against-satanists-over-invocation/4903564002/+&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us Cached]</ref> | ||
|Ongoing | |Ongoing | ||
<ref>[https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca9/20-15338 20-15338], last docket report April 28, 2020: ''Filing 12 Filed order MEDIATION (LCC): A review of the record and the response to this courts March 3, 2020 order reveals that the district court has denied the post-judgment motion and that an amended notice of appeal has been filed to include the order denying the post-judgment motion. Accordingly, the notice of appeal is so amended, and briefing shall proceed. The opening brief and excerpts of record are due June 29, 2020; the answering brief is due July 29, 2020; and the optional reply brief is due within 21 days after service of the answering brief.[11674157] (WL) [Entered: 04/28/2020 10:54 AM''</ref> | |||
|} | |} | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
<references /> | <references /> | ||
Revision as of 07:49, 6 February 2021
Lua error in Module:Incorporated_Entities at line 16: header must be either of type string or number. The Satanic Temple, Inc. is a Chapter 180 Religious Company. It is distinct from United Federation of Churches, LLC which does business as "The Satanic Temple", but "The Satanic Temple, Inc." was the original owner of the trademark "The Satanic Temple" due to a filing error. [1]
It's registered agent is Douglas Misicko, who also serves as its president, treasurer, clerk, and director. [2]
It was organized Nov. 14, 2017, in Salem, Massachusetts at 64 Bridge Street, a property shared with United Federation of Churches and several other corporations owned by Cevin Soling. It was initially registered as "The Satanic Temple" before having its name changed to "The Satanic Temple, Inc." on May 24, 2019.
Unlike "The Satanic Temple", Federal EIN 82-3404757 "The Satanic Temple, Inc." is owned solely by Misicko. In February 2019, it achieved Public Charity Status under Section 170(b)(1)(A)(i), "a church or a convention or association of churches." [3]
In the online store for TheSatanicTemple.com, products such as hoodies, hot sauce, or a "Lucien Greaves Hand-Signed Baphomet Sketch" proceed as typical sales. However, donations such as "Contribute To The Satanic Temple" include the following text:[4]
The Satanic Temple, Inc. is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization. Your donation is tax-deductible in accordance with IRS rules and regulations. The Federal Tax ID is 82-3404757.
Lawsuits
The Satanic Temple Inc. has been involved in at least four lawsuits since its formation.
| Filed | Case name | Original Jurisdiction | Case Number | Result | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 02/04/2021 | Satanic Temple, The v. Belle Plaine, City of | US District Court for the District of Minnesota | 0:2021cv00336 | Ongoing | |
| 1/20/2021 | The Satanic Temple, Inc. v. City of Boston | US District Court of Massachusetts - Boston | 1:21-cv-10102 | Ongoing | |
| 9/27/2020 | The Satanic Temple, Inc. v. Lamar Advertising of Louisiana, LLC | 19th West Circuit Court 5 (Benton County, Ark.) | 04CV-20-2100 | Ongoing | |
| 2/26/2018 | The Satanic Temple, Inc., et al v. City of Scottsdale | US District Court of Arizona - Phoenix | 2:2018cv00621 | Failed[5] | Ongoing |
References
- ↑ In the statement, line 2, "The Satanic Temple, Inc." should be deleted, and The Satanic Temple should be inserted., Justia.Com
- ↑ The Satanic Temple, Inc., MA SOS# 001299281
- ↑ The Satanic Temple, FEIN 82-3404757
- ↑ TheSatanicTemple.com, "Donate"
- ↑ A U.S. District Court judge ruled this month that Scottsdale did not discriminate against the Satanic Temple when the city blocked a member of the group from giving an invocation before a City Council meeting in 2016. Judge David Campbell ruled the Satanic Temple did not prove the city had denied its request because of its religious beliefs. Scottsdale wins court battle against Satanists over right to give invocation; Satanists appeal, Arizona Republic, Feb. 29, 2020 Cached
- ↑ 20-15338, last docket report April 28, 2020: Filing 12 Filed order MEDIATION (LCC): A review of the record and the response to this courts March 3, 2020 order reveals that the district court has denied the post-judgment motion and that an amended notice of appeal has been filed to include the order denying the post-judgment motion. Accordingly, the notice of appeal is so amended, and briefing shall proceed. The opening brief and excerpts of record are due June 29, 2020; the answering brief is due July 29, 2020; and the optional reply brief is due within 21 days after service of the answering brief.[11674157] (WL) [Entered: 04/28/2020 10:54 AM