Jay Sekulow fleeces donors for big money

Last updated on: September 7, 2011 at 7:49 pm by Fred Clark

Jay Sekulow fleeces donors for big money 2011-09-07T19:49:37-04:00 Fred Clark

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

“Blessed are those who pretend to be persecuted, for they shall reap truckloads of cash and live like Hollywood stars.”

No, that’s not from the Bible. It’s my paraphrase of Bob Smietana’s scrupulous piece of investigative journalism for The Tennessean: “Christian crusaders cash in: Sekulow’s family, firm collect millions.”

Jay Sekulow is the head of the American Center for Law and Justice. The legal charity was founded in 1990 by televangelist and former Republican presidential candidate Pat Robertson to be a kind of sectarian variation on the ACLU. The ACLJ has since become a kind of organizational embodiment of the weird persecution complex that drives the behavior of much of America’s privileged majority religion.

Sekulow also runs the closely associated charity CASE (“Christian Advocates Serving Evangelism”). According to The Tennessean’s Smietana:

Since 1998, the two charities have paid out more than $33 million to members of Sekulow’s family and businesses they own or co-own, according to the charities’ federal tax returns, known as form 990s.

One of the charities is controlled by the Sekulow family — tax documents show that all four of CASE’s board members are Sekulows and another is an officer. …

Over the past two decades ACLJ has argued for legitimate cases in defense of the free exercise of religion, including the 1993 Lamb’s Chapel case. That case involved equal access to public facilities for religious groups. A school in New York state allowed outside groups use of the premises when school was not in session, but sought to deny the Lamb’s Chapel group that same access.

The ACLJ joined the ACLU in defending the religious group’s right to equal access. That alliance illustrates the difference between the ACLU and the ACLJ.

The ACLU, as its name indicates, exists to defend the civil liberties of anyone in America. In 1993, that meant defending the right of a conservative evangelical church group to show a series of James Dobson films in a public facility that was supposed to be open to all. That same year it also meant defending the religious freedom of a congregation of Santeria practitioners in Hialeah, Fla.

Here’s the summary of the Hialeah case from Oyez.org:

The Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye practiced the Afro-Caribbean-based religion of Santeria. Santeria used animal sacrifice as a form of worship in which an animal’s carotid arteries would be cut and, except during healing and death rights, the animal would be eaten. Shortly after the announcement of the establishment of a Santeria church in Hialeah, Florida, the city council adopted several ordinances addressing religious sacrifice. The ordinances prohibited possession of animals for sacrifice or slaughter, with specific exemptions for state-licensed activities. …

The ACLU fought to defend civil liberties and religious freedom in both Lamb’s Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School District and Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah because that is what the ACLU does: It defends civil liberties and religious freedom.

The ACLJ fought for religious freedom and civil liberties in Lamb’s Chapel because the plaintiffs were evangelical Christians. The ACLJ did not fight for religious freedom and civil liberties in Hialeah because the plaintiffs in that case were not evangelical Christians. This is what the ACLJ does: It defends the interests and privileges of evangelical Christians in legal disputes.

The ACLU, of course, is much larger than the ACLJ, and it might just be that the smaller group took a walk on Hialeah in order to preserve its limited resources by focusing only on particular cases involving a particular sort of plaintiffs.

But that’s not what’s going on with the ACLJ. It’s not just focused on protecting the rights of one particular religious sect — it actively opposes the free exercise of those rights by other sects. The ACLJ, for example, has been at the forefront of efforts to bar Islamic congregations from simply purchasing private property for their own use — such as the Manhattan cultural center that ACLJ mischaracterizes as “the ground-zero mosque” (it’s neither a mosque nor at ground zero).

This distinguishes the ACLJ not just from the ACLU, but from most religious groups here in America. Most religious groups recognize that a threat to the religious liberty of any sect is a threat to the religious liberty of all sects. That’s why a host of religious groups filed amicus briefs in Hialeah in support of the Santeria church. All of the major Christian denominations did so, as well as several different Jewish groups, the Mormons and a wide assortment of groups representing those who usually have to check the box marked “other” on surveys asking about their religion. Hialeah’s statute, they all said, clearly restricted the Santeros’ free exercise of religion and therefore clearly violated the First Amendment.

The Rehnquist Court agreed, emphatically — ruling 9-0 in favor of the Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye. The decision was celebrated by all those other religious groups as a victory. None of them was directly affected by the statute or directly relieved by its being overturned, but they recognized that a threat to the religious freedom of Santeros was also a threat to their own religious freedom and that defending their own rights also entails defending those rights for others.

Sekulow & Co. don’t seem to understand that. Or else they understand it, but just don’t care. That’s why I say that the ACLJ doesn’t exist to defend civil liberties and religious freedoms, but rather that it exists to defend the interests and privileges of evangelical Christians.

Or that’s what I used to say about the ACLJ before reading Bob Smietana’s excellent reporting in The Tennessean.

After reading that, I no longer believe that the ACLJ’s reason for existence has anything to do with the sectarian interests of the evangelical Christians it nominally defends. I now believe it exists only to keep Jay Sekulow and his relatives rolling in cash and luxuriating in the lifestyle to which they have become accustomed.

Since 1998, the two charities have paid out more than $33 million to members of Sekulow’s family and businesses they own or co-own, according to the charities’ federal tax returns, known as form 990s. …

Among the payments since 1998:

$15.4 million to the Constitutional Litigation and Advocacy Group, a law firm co-owned by Jay Sekulow. According to the 2009 tax form, he owns 50 percent of CLAG. The firm was known as the Center for Law and Justice when it received some of the payments.

$5.7 million to Gary Sekulow, Jay Sekulow’s brother. He is paid for two full-time jobs — as CFO of both the American Center for Law and Justice, or ACLJ, and Christian Advocates Serving Evangelism, or CASE. In 2009, his combined compensation topped $600,000.

$2.74 million in private jet lease payments to Regency Productions, a company owned by Jay Sekulow, and PFMS, a company owned by his sister-in-law, Kim Sekulow.

$1.78 million to Regency Productions for leasing office space and media production.

$1.11 million to PFMS for administrative and media buying services.

$1.6 million to Pam Sekulow, Jay Sekulow’s wife, including a $245,000 loan from CASE, which she used to purchase a home from the charity. The balance of the loan was later forgiven over several years and reported on the 990s as income.

$681,911 to Jay Sekulow’s sons, Logan and Jordan, for media work and other duties at CASE. …

A donor to ACLJ wouldn’t know how much Sekulow is earning from his work with the organization, even though he is described as CEO, chief counsel and board member on its tax forms. ACLJ reports that Sekulow has taken no salary since 2002.

However, ACLJ’s 2009 tax form shows it paid $2,382,770 to the law firm 50 percent owned by Sekulow — Constitutional Litigation and Advocacy Group. The fact that the law firm is half-owned by Sekulow is not found in ACLJ’s tax filings. Hoover confirmed that the law firm pays Sekulow, but the firm does not disclose how much Sekulow is paid. The firm’s office address is in a building owned by CASE.

In addition, Sekulow was paid $85,747 by CASE in fiscal year 2009. …

In a phone call, Ronn Torossian, a public relations executive serving as ACLJ’s spokesman, portrayed Sekulow as a great lawyer getting by on modest pay.

“You are asking about one of the most successful lawyers in the country whose income is very small and owns a very small home,” he said.

Property records show Jay and Pam Sekulow own three homes, including one they bought in 2008 in Franklin for $655,000 and another in Norfolk, Va., bought in 2005 for $690,000. Their third home, which once belonged to CASE, is in Waynesville, N.C., and is assessed at $262,800, according to Haywood County, N.C., tax records.

Uncategorized

church & state

religious right

Previous Post

September 7, 2011

TF: Post-Rapture economics

Next Post

September 8, 2011 Hail to thee, our alma mater

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category class warfare evangelicals Iraq Left Behind Mammon music Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What is taught about promises or oaths?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Never promise Swear on everything Change your answer Let your yes be yes