9th Circuit throws out Huntsman tithing case

[rpn]

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2025/01/31/alert-lds-church-prevails-federal/

[Pyreaux]

No surprise here. If anyone forgot, several media outlets previously presented James Huntsman’s lawsuit as credible; The Salt Lake Tribune, Fox 13 News Utah, and Americans United highlighted Huntsman’s allegations that the Church misused tithing funds to support commercial projects like the City Creek Mall and Beneficial Life Insurance. Americans United supported Huntsman’s claims by citing a whistleblower report and arguing that churches do not have a free pass to mislead donors

Now that the Ninth Circuit has thrown out the case, media outlets that leaned into Huntsman’s narrative should face scrutiny over whether they reported the case with sufficient skepticism; misrepresented legal precedents or prematurely assumed a likely victory for Huntsman. Though, the Anti-LDS media will probably still say this is forever-relevant or a miscarriage of justice for the next century:

 

Edited February 1, 2025 by Pyreaux

[The Nehor]

On 1/31/2025 at 6:41 PM, Pyreaux said:

No surprise here. If anyone forgot, several media outlets previously presented James Huntsman’s lawsuit as credible; The Salt Lake Tribune, Fox 13 News Utah, and Americans United highlighted Huntsman’s allegations that the Church misused tithing funds to support commercial projects like the City Creek Mall and Beneficial Life Insurance. Americans United supported Huntsman’s claims by citing a whistleblower report and arguing that churches do not have a free pass to mislead donors

Now that the Ninth Circuit has thrown out the case, media outlets that leaned into Huntsman’s narrative should face scrutiny over whether they reported the case with sufficient skepticism; misrepresented legal precedents or prematurely assumed a likely victory for Huntsman. Though, the Anti-LDS media will probably still say this is forever-relevant or a miscarriage of justice for the next century:

With journalism being more and more monopolized and not being done in general there are far more important things to scrutinize than showing sufficient skepticism about a court case.

I agree with the court’s decision. It was a silly situation.

[longview]

20 hours ago, The Nehor said:

With journalism being more and more monopolized and not being done in general there are far more important things to scrutinize than showing sufficient skepticism about a court case.

Not quite sure what you mean by "monopolized." Rush Limbaugh's radio program was first nationally syndicated in 1988 which broke the stranglehold of the dominant media. In the last several years we are seeing an explosion of popular podcasters such as Joe Rogan and others.

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, longview said:

Not quite sure what you mean by "monopolized." Rush Limbaugh's radio program was first nationally syndicated in 1988 which broke the stranglehold of the dominant media. In the last several years we are seeing an explosion of popular podcasters such as Joe Rogan and others.

Big organizations spent years buying up small and local news stations.

There was no stranglehold to break in 1988. All he did was become popular.

[Robert F. Smith]

On 1/31/2025 at 12:26 PM, rpn said:

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2025/01/31/alert-lds-church-prevails-federal/

This was always a long shot, and likely only brought against the Church as deliberate harrassment.

[JAHS]

Deseret News: Aug 26, 2025, 11:17 a.m. MDT
The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals handed down a ruling Tuesday that is a major victory for religions in general and a specific win for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

A three-judge panel upheld a 2023 federal district court ruling that rejected a lawsuit purporting that the Church of Jesus Christ had propounded false beliefs and misrepresented its history and practices to defraud members of donations.

“This is a great day for religious liberty in America,” said Gene Schaerr, an attorney who filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case on behalf of the National Association of Evangelicals, the Jewish Coalition for Religious Liberty and the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists.

Former Latter-day Saint Laura Gaddy and others sued the church in 2018 claiming it fraudulently misrepresented its history and misused the tithing funds they donated. They made claims that the church’s practices violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.

Read the article here:
10th Circuit Court rules for Latter-day Saints in tithing, fraud case

Edited August 27, 2025 by JAHS

[Calm]

1 hour ago, JAHS said:

Deseret News: Aug 26, 2025, 11:17 a.m. MDT
The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals handed down a ruling Tuesday that is a major victory for religions in general and a specific win for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

A three-judge panel upheld a 2023 federal district court ruling that rejected a lawsuit purporting that the Church of Jesus Christ had propounded false beliefs and misrepresented its history and practices to defraud members of donations.

“This is a great day for religious liberty in America,” said Gene Schaerr, an attorney who filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case on behalf of the National Association of Evangelicals, the Jewish Coalition for Religious Liberty and the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists.

Former Latter-day Saint Laura Gaddy and others sued the church in 2018 claiming it fraudulently misrepresented its history and misused the tithing funds they donated. They made claims that the church’s practices violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.

Read the article here:
10th Circuit Court rules for Latter-day Saints in tithing, fraud case

Is this the end of the road or if they want to waste more time and money, what higher courts can they appeal to?

Reading the article because they intelligently asked the same question I did and got us an answer:

Quote

Gaddy and the other plaintiffs have two options if they decide to continue the case. They could ask for an en banc review of the ruling by the three judges, essentially asking for a review of the decision by the entire panel of judges on the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.

They also could appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

No way would the current USSC rule against the Church on this matter, imo.

Edited August 27, 2025 by Calm

[webbles]

I really wish that news organizations would link to the actual opinions.  I went and found it so if you are wanting to read it yourself, see https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/ca10/files/opinions/010111288755.pdf

It mentions the Huntsman case several times in the footnotes.

[JustAnAustralian]

From the Trib article https://www.sltrib.com/news/2025/08/26/appeals-court-rejects-lawsuit/

Quote

Salt Lake City-based attorney Kay Burningham, representing Gaddy and co-plaintiffs Lyle Small and Leanne Harris, said they would appeal Tuesday’s ruling directly to the U.S. Supreme Court

Are they ever actually going to pay attention to judges when they tell them to stop talking about church teachings? Or is this a case where Burningham is making these statements publicly, but is making good use of "my instructions are..." in court?

[Kenngo1969]

On 8/26/2025 at 8:56 PM, Calm said:

... No way would the current USSC rule against the Church on this matter, imo.

If the current Court even agrees to hear the case, and that's a big "if."  Not even the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (one of the more liberal circuit courts in the Nation ... often overturned, seldom in doubt [they don't call it the Notorious Ninth for Nothing!  Hey!  Alliteration!  Cool!  I like it!) is dumb enough to buy(s) the sort of argument put forth by the Gaddys and Burninghams of the world.

Edited August 29, 2025 by Kenngo1969

[Calm]

More than likely they figured out they weren’t going to win pretty quickly and it’s more about the publicity they get, the chance to call the Church a fraud and its leaders liars in major news media over and over again.

Edited August 29, 2025 by Calm