The Satanic Temple Inc: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (7 revisions imported) |
(added PACER monitor links and updated Scottsdale and Lamar cases) |
||
| Line 61: | Line 61: | ||
|US District Court for the District of Minnesota | |US District Court for the District of Minnesota | ||
|[https://dockets.justia.com/docket/minnesota/mndce/0:2021cv00336/192453 0:2021cv00336] | |[https://dockets.justia.com/docket/minnesota/mndce/0:2021cv00336/192453 0:2021cv00336] | ||
|Ongoing | |Ongoing<ref>[https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/38166822/Satanic_Temple,_Inc,_The_v_City_of_Belle_Plaine,_MN 0:21-cv-00336] - | ||
Case Filed: Feb 04, 2021</ref><ref>[https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/27959837/Satanic_Temple,_The_v_Belle_Plaine,_City_of_et_al 0:19-cv-01122] - Case Filed: Apr 25, 2019</ref> | |||
| | | | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Line 68: | Line 69: | ||
|US District Court of Massachusetts - 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<ref>[https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/37984635/The_Satanic_Temple,_Inc_v_City_of_Boston, 0:21-cv-00336] - Case Filed: Feb 04, 2021</ref> | ||
| | | | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Line 75: | Line 76: | ||
|19th West Circuit Court 5 (Benton County, Ark.) | |19th West Circuit Court 5 (Benton County, Ark.) | ||
|[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] | |[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] | ||
| | |Failed<ref>[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] - Case Filed: Sep. 27, 2020; [https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/imaging/IMAGES/DMS/CK_Image.Present2?DMS_ID=C0F58DA996CDEB10C0DA86528D5A7E064E5664235B849BD037A0F3900A0751AC961668CE74023E7153C774642DC3E45570E24E18141E6D391500EB182BD2EF5A&i_url=https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/imaging/IMAGES/DMS Dismissed]: Feb 26, 2021 via [https://casetext.com/rule/arkansas-court-rules/arkansas-rules-of-civil-procedure/rule-41-dismissal-of-actions#:~:text=Rule%2041%20%2D%20Dismissal%20of%20Actions%20(a)Voluntary%20Dismissal%3B,trial%20is%20by%20the%20court. voluntary dismissal (without prejudice)]</ref> | ||
| | | | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Line 82: | Line 83: | ||
|US District Court of Arizona - Phoenix | |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>[https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/23799324/Satanic_Temple_et_al_v_Scottsdale,_City_of_et_al 20-15338] - | ||
Case Filed: Feb 26, 2018; Terminated: Feb 06, 2020</ref><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.'' | |||
''Judge David Campbell ruled the Satanic Temple did not prove the city had denied its request because of its religious beliefs.'' | ''Judge David Campbell ruled the Satanic Temple did not prove the city had denied its request because of its religious beliefs.'' | ||
[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 - Oral arguments heard 3/18/2021<ref>[https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/calendar/view.php?caseno=20-15338 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Calendar] ''Appeal from a bench trial judgment for defendants in an action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that the City of Scottsdale discriminated against plaintiffs on the basis of their religious beliefs or identity. [2:18-cv-00621-DGC].''</ref><ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fO3ojPSA7I Video of Oral Arguments to 20-15338 The Satanic Temple, Inc. v. City of Scottsdale]</ref> | ||
|} | |} | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
<references /> | <references /> | ||
Revision as of 12:29, 11 May 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.
Its registered agent is Douglas Misicko, who also serves as its president, treasurer, clerk, and director. There are no other officers. [1]
It was initially registered as "The Satanic Temple" before having its name changed to "The Satanic Temple, Inc." on May 24, 2019. "The Satanic Temple, Inc." was the original owner of the trademark "The Satanic Temple" due to a filing error. [2]
It is distinct from United Federation of Churches, LLC, which also does business as "The Satanic Temple."
The Satanic Temple, Inc. 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.
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 five lawsuits since its formation, at least some of which were originally begun as .
| Filed | Case name | Original Jurisdiction | Case Number | Result | Appeal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2/05/2021 | The Satanic Temple, Inc. et al v. Hellerstedt et al | US District Court for the Southern District of Texas | 4:21-cv-00387 | Ongoing | |
| 2/04/2021 | Satanic Temple, The v. Belle Plaine, City of | US District Court for the District of Minnesota | 0:2021cv00336 | Ongoing[5][6] | |
| 1/20/2021 | The Satanic Temple, Inc. v. City of Boston | US District Court of Massachusetts - Boston | 1:21-cv-10102 | Ongoing[7] | |
| 9/27/2020 | The Satanic Temple, Inc. v. Lamar Advertising of Louisiana, LLC | 19th West Circuit Court 5 (Benton County, Ark.) | 04CV-20-2100 | Failed[8] | |
| 2/26/2018 | The Satanic Temple, Inc., et al v. City of Scottsdale | US District Court of Arizona - Phoenix | 2:2018cv00621 | Failed[9][10] | Ongoing - Oral arguments heard 3/18/2021[11][12] |
References
- ↑ The Satanic Temple, Inc., MA SOS# 001299281
- ↑ In the statement, line 2, "The Satanic Temple, Inc." should be deleted, and The Satanic Temple should be inserted., Justia.Com
- ↑ The Satanic Temple, FEIN 82-3404757
- ↑ TheSatanicTemple.com, "Donate"
- ↑ 0:21-cv-00336 - Case Filed: Feb 04, 2021
- ↑ 0:19-cv-01122 - Case Filed: Apr 25, 2019
- ↑ 0:21-cv-00336 - Case Filed: Feb 04, 2021
- ↑ 04CV-20-2100 - Case Filed: Sep. 27, 2020; Dismissed: Feb 26, 2021 via voluntary dismissal (without prejudice)
- ↑ 20-15338 - Case Filed: Feb 26, 2018; Terminated: Feb 06, 2020
- ↑ 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
- ↑ 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Calendar Appeal from a bench trial judgment for defendants in an action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that the City of Scottsdale discriminated against plaintiffs on the basis of their religious beliefs or identity. [2:18-cv-00621-DGC].
- ↑ Video of Oral Arguments to 20-15338 The Satanic Temple, Inc. v. City of Scottsdale