Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list
Posted on 01/11/2012 4:52:22 PM PST by NYer
In a landmark January 11 decision, the US Supreme Court ruled that religious bodies should set their own standards for hiring ministers, free from government interference.
The unanimous decision in the case of Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church v. EEOC was described by Douglas Laycock, who successfully argued the case before the high court, as a “huge win for religious liberty.”
The Hosanna-Tabor case was the result of a discrimination lawsuit, filed by a woman who claimed that she had been wrongly dismissed by the Michigan Lutheran congregation. The Supreme Court ruled the congregation was exempt from such an anti-discrimination suit. The ruling indicated that the First Amendment to the US Constitution, in its guarantee of religious freedom, means that a religious body should “be free to choose those who will guide it on its way.”
Writing for the court, Chief Justice John Roberts explained that the government’s interest in preventing discrimination is important. “But so too is the interest of religious groups in choosing who will preach their beliefs, teach their faith, and carry out their mission.”
The case upholds the legal tradition the “ministerial exception”—the understanding that secular courts should not judge the standards by which religious bodies select their own ministers. The January 11 ruling left unsettled the related question of which employees of religious institutions may accurately be described as ministers rather than ordinary employees.
The Obama administration, arguing for the plaintiff in the Hosanna-Tabor case, had taken an aggressive stand in favor of government intervention in the affairs of religious bodies. During oral arguments in October, Justice Stephen Breyer had observed that the government’s argument seemed to allow for a discrimination case against the Catholic Church, for excluding women from priestly ordination.
Additional sources for this story
Some links will take you to other sites, in a new window.
Obama and his running dog lackeys may need to commit seppuku over this one. They'd planned so hard for a win that Michelle must be in tears.
Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of Religion, or prohibiting the free practice thereof..."
The context at the time clearly meant the federal congress, and had absolutely nothing to do with any restriction on state congresses (many of which had religious tests for serving in their governments at the time).
Seems clear the Feds can not possibly pass a law telling a religious institution who they can and can not hire as the clergy. But I don't see that State laws are affected.
We’ll see if mac daddy decides if he agrees with that or if choose to ignore it like those parts of the law that he decided he will ignore before.
We’ll see if mac daddy decides if he agrees with that or if choose to ignore it like those parts of the law that he decided he will ignore before.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.