Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 1, 1991, Page 42
Cults in Court
Sara Van Hoey
San Francisco, California
Abstract
Harms associated with cultic groups have been addressed through various
forms of self-help, conservatorship, habeas corpus proceedings, consumer
protection legislation, and litigation. First Amendment concerns loom large in
such remedies. This paper reviews three important instances of litigation:
Molko v. Holy Spirit Association, George v. International Society for Krishna
Consciousness, and Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology. These and other
cases indicate that self-proclaimed religious organizations are heading
towards a time of greater accountability. Juries tend to be sympathetic toward
plaintiffs, though courts seem unwilling to enforce judgments so large they
threaten a group‟s existence.
Cults in America are widely misunderstood by the general public. Many have become
mainstream and have gained a measure of wealth, respectability and security, if not
downright social legitimacy.1 Cults occasionally surface in the news: recently, Elizabeth
Clare Prophet‟s Church Universal and Triumphant sparked a bitter controversy when its
members dug multiple ground shelters under acres of Montana landscape to prepare for
“the end of the world.” The Los Angeles Times published a six-part expose of L. Ron
Hubbard‟s Church of Scientology in June, 1990 in the wake of recent cases against that
organization.
In the past, news coverage of the cult phenomenon often was limited to discoveries of
grossly aberrant, sensational or criminal activities, such as the People‟s Temple massacre in
Guyana. Much was written in the late seventies and early eighties about the dangers posed
to society by groups that abuse mind control techniques under the guise of religion, but
public attention in the late eighties shifted to other issues, particularly drug abuse and
AIDS.
The cult problem, however, is ongoing and ever-growing, and remains a threat to America‟s
young people. One anti-cult organization estimates that there are more than 2,500 cults
and other “destructive totalist” organizations now active in the United States, and these
groups control approximately six million members.2
Combating the cults presents its own problems. Those seeking to hold cults accountable for
their actions against individual members inevitably clash with the cults‟ assertion of their
fundamental right to religious liberty. The courts have tackled these competing interests in
several recent cases with results that may give hope to critics of cult groups. But the battles
are far from over.
Cults3 are coordinated programs that systematically apply undue influence and behavior
control techniques to produce in members substantial modification of fundamental modes of
thought, world view and conduct. Margaret Singer, a professor of psychology at the
University of California at Berkeley and San Francisco and an expert on the impact of cultic
influences on individual personality, defined cults as:
Groups with religious, political, psychologic, and other ideologies at their core,
which almost universally offer as their central theme a special, new psychological
awareness handed down by an indisputable and arbitrary authority that uses the
technique of thought reform.4
Cults in Court
Sara Van Hoey
San Francisco, California
Abstract
Harms associated with cultic groups have been addressed through various
forms of self-help, conservatorship, habeas corpus proceedings, consumer
protection legislation, and litigation. First Amendment concerns loom large in
such remedies. This paper reviews three important instances of litigation:
Molko v. Holy Spirit Association, George v. International Society for Krishna
Consciousness, and Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology. These and other
cases indicate that self-proclaimed religious organizations are heading
towards a time of greater accountability. Juries tend to be sympathetic toward
plaintiffs, though courts seem unwilling to enforce judgments so large they
threaten a group‟s existence.
Cults in America are widely misunderstood by the general public. Many have become
mainstream and have gained a measure of wealth, respectability and security, if not
downright social legitimacy.1 Cults occasionally surface in the news: recently, Elizabeth
Clare Prophet‟s Church Universal and Triumphant sparked a bitter controversy when its
members dug multiple ground shelters under acres of Montana landscape to prepare for
“the end of the world.” The Los Angeles Times published a six-part expose of L. Ron
Hubbard‟s Church of Scientology in June, 1990 in the wake of recent cases against that
organization.
In the past, news coverage of the cult phenomenon often was limited to discoveries of
grossly aberrant, sensational or criminal activities, such as the People‟s Temple massacre in
Guyana. Much was written in the late seventies and early eighties about the dangers posed
to society by groups that abuse mind control techniques under the guise of religion, but
public attention in the late eighties shifted to other issues, particularly drug abuse and
AIDS.
The cult problem, however, is ongoing and ever-growing, and remains a threat to America‟s
young people. One anti-cult organization estimates that there are more than 2,500 cults
and other “destructive totalist” organizations now active in the United States, and these
groups control approximately six million members.2
Combating the cults presents its own problems. Those seeking to hold cults accountable for
their actions against individual members inevitably clash with the cults‟ assertion of their
fundamental right to religious liberty. The courts have tackled these competing interests in
several recent cases with results that may give hope to critics of cult groups. But the battles
are far from over.
Cults3 are coordinated programs that systematically apply undue influence and behavior
control techniques to produce in members substantial modification of fundamental modes of
thought, world view and conduct. Margaret Singer, a professor of psychology at the
University of California at Berkeley and San Francisco and an expert on the impact of cultic
influences on individual personality, defined cults as:
Groups with religious, political, psychologic, and other ideologies at their core,
which almost universally offer as their central theme a special, new psychological
awareness handed down by an indisputable and arbitrary authority that uses the
technique of thought reform.4
