Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama’s lawyers bid to regulate religious hiring
http://dailycaller.com ^ | 10/04/2011 | Neil Munro

Posted on 10/04/2011 6:21:20 AM PDT by massmike

Barack Obama’s Department of Justice will ask the Supreme Court to eliminate a long-standing legal precedent that protects religious organizations from government regulations.

The department “is going against what almost every court has decided … it has has taken an outlier position,” said Richard Garnett, a law professor at the University of Notre Dame and a senior fellow at the Center for the Study of Law & Religion at Emory University.

On Wednesday, lawyers will present their oral arguments to the Supreme Court in “Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.”

Cheryl Perich taught religion and a secular subject at the Michigan Hoasanna-Tabor school until she fell ill in 2004. When the school replaced her, she sued under the Americans with Disabilities Act. She lost the first round in 2004, but her lawyers persuaded the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati to rule in her favor last year.

The church had argued that her job was not covered by employment law because it was religious and so shielded from federal regulation under the traditional “ministerial exception.” That’s a long-standing term used in courtrooms to describe religious employees’ exemption from secular employment law.

The exemption is a legal spin-off from the Establishment Clause of the Constitution. That is part of the First Amendment, and was adopted in 1791 to shield religious institutions from government regulation, such as the creation of state-funded established churches similar to the Church of England.

The administration’s legal brief asks the court to eliminate this ministerial exemption, and to make all but a few core religious jobs subject to secular employment law.

If the administration’s claim is approved, government-appointed judges “could impose ministers on churches against their will,” said Luke Goodrich, a legal council at the Becket Fund, a religious-liberties group.

(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...


TOPICS: Religion & Politics
KEYWORDS: dnc4islam; dncvsamerica; firstamendment; moralabsolutes; moslemincharge; obamaismoslem

1 posted on 10/04/2011 6:21:22 AM PDT by massmike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: massmike

We’re gonna need a bigger broom in 2012.


2 posted on 10/04/2011 6:23:40 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks

“Barack Obama’s Department of Justice” is an oxymoron.


3 posted on 10/04/2011 6:25:54 AM PDT by cumbo78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: massmike
He's trying to take away our Freedom of Religion by NOT allowing “religious” exceptions. He's trying to SECULARIZE our society and of course you know what will happen with that - a Sodom and Gomorrah - NO MORAL BOUNDARIES.
4 posted on 10/04/2011 6:27:46 AM PDT by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike
He's trying to take away our Freedom of Religion by NOT allowing “religious” exceptions. He's trying to SECULARIZE our society and of course you know what will happen with that - a Sodom and Gomorrah - NO MORAL BOUNDARIES.
5 posted on 10/04/2011 6:27:59 AM PDT by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Typical RAT, perverting the Constitution. If Congress can't pass a law; subvert the Supreme Court to impose a rule - just like the traitors did with abortion.

If this were to be considered, this would fall under the auspices of the STATE, not the Federal Government.

I see nothing wrong with the Catholic Church, limiting their employment roles to practicing Catholics - same with Baptist, Mormon, Jewish, Wicca et. al. Do the Jewish Rabbi's now have to hire an Islamic janitor - who is actively trying to exterminate every Jew he sees?

When you have a morally bankrupt politically party - you expect them to commit legal atrocities. And I never fail to feel sick to my stomach as they do this. I hope Satan has a special place in hell for people like this.

6 posted on 10/04/2011 6:30:33 AM PDT by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike

I swear...the Zer0 numbnuts apparently can’t even figure out the “law of holes”....


7 posted on 10/04/2011 6:33:27 AM PDT by B.O. Plenty (Give war a chance...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike
If the administration’s claim is approved, government-appointed judges “could impose ministers on churches against their will,” said Luke Goodrich, a legal council at the Becket Fund, a religious-liberties group.

ie a Catholic priest for a Methodist church? or a Lutheran minister to the OPC?

And goodbye to the conscience clause.

8 posted on 10/04/2011 6:34:36 AM PDT by Judith Anne ( Holy Mary, Mother of God, please pray for us sinners now, and at the hour of our death.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Judith Anne

Much bigger broom.


9 posted on 10/04/2011 6:36:09 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: massmike
If you thought “forced busing” was bad, wait until you see forced clergy and churches being under the control of the courts the way some states elections still are fifty years after any reason for the court to have any role is gone.
10 posted on 10/04/2011 6:37:23 AM PDT by Rashputin (Obama is insane but kept medicated and on golf courses to hide it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike

Death blow to freedom of religion and freedom of thought and speech too, come to think of it


11 posted on 10/04/2011 6:38:38 AM PDT by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike; flat; JLAGRAYFOX; freekitty; SouthTexas; unkus; overbore; seekthetruth; MamaDearest

How much longer will the eunuch, Boner, and the Republican House members stay blind, deaf, and mute on the destruction being wrought upon our nation by this wannabe dictator and his horde of corrupt vermin? When will We The People start yelling loud enough to be heard by these blind, deaf, spineless, gutless fools in DC?


12 posted on 10/04/2011 6:39:54 AM PDT by ExTexasRedhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike

The Tyrant’s AG: ”Your King now demands every synagogue
and church must now have an Imam on its Board
and on its pulpit at every service
taken from one of the King's 57 States.
Or the Congregants shall no longer be allowed to meet.
..... Unless they are Moslem or black, of course."

13 posted on 10/04/2011 6:45:04 AM PDT by Diogenesis ("Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. " Pres. Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike
Just imagine what this would do to hospitals that do NOT embrace ABORTION! This would REQUIRE ALL to perform abortions even though this is AGAINST their “RELIGIOUS” beliefs.

Imagine how this would create a euthanasia boom! If you don't believe in ENDING the LIFE of an ADULT because they are not “deemed worthy of life”, this would FORCE people AGAINST this to out them down like animals.

The “imagines” go on and on and ALL the outcomes are ANTI-CHRISIAN.

14 posted on 10/04/2011 6:46:22 AM PDT by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Judith Anne
ie a Catholic priest for a Methodist church? or a Lutheran minister to the OPC?

That would be a best case scenario.

15 posted on 10/04/2011 6:47:11 AM PDT by Oratam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: massmike
GOVERNMENT would LITERALLY replace GOD!

Since no “religious” exceptions would be allowed.

This is VERY dangerous and VERY unconstitutional.

16 posted on 10/04/2011 6:48:01 AM PDT by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nmh
He's trying to take away our Freedom of Religion by NOT allowing “religious” exceptions.

How about a different, equally undesirable, interpretation--He wants to unionize religious employees, too. In this case, he wants to extend government labor "protections" (as in "protection racket") to someone formerly considered an exempt worker.

17 posted on 10/04/2011 6:49:43 AM PDT by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: massmike

No job is worth 7 years of fighting for and a trip to the Supreme Court. Who would hire such a libtard? Even if she wins the legal lotto what chance does she have to collect her liquid justice from a poor church? Life is too short to waste it in court fighting.


18 posted on 10/04/2011 6:54:43 AM PDT by Reeses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike

As is frequently the case, this article is a bit disingenuous.

The teacher was hired under a contract which did not allow her to be fired without cause. She became ill, and the school and

“Hosanna-Tabor administrators suggested that Perich apply for a disability leave of absence for the 2004-2005 school year. The principal of Hosanna-Tabor, Stacy Hoeft, informed Perich that she would “still have a job with [Hosanna-Tabor]” when she regained her health. (Dist. Ct. R.E. 24 Ex. 6). Perich agreed to take a disability leave and did not return to work at the beginning of the 2004-2005 school year. Throughout her leave, Perich regularly provided Hoeft with updates about her condition and progress.”

Then, “on January 21, 2005, Hoeft informed Perich that the school board intended to amend the employee handbook to request that employees on disability for more than six months resign their calls to allow Hosanna-Tabor to responsibly fill their positions. Such resignations would not necessarily prevent reinstatement of these employees’ calls upon their return to health. Perich had been on disability for more than five months when she received this email.”

The teacher’s doctor said she could resume teaching. She had been diagnosed with narcolepsy, but the doctor said it could be fully controlled with medication.

“On February 8, 2005, Perich’s doctor gave her a written release to return to work without restrictions on February 22, 2005. The next day Salo contacted Perich to discuss her employment. Perich instead requested to meet with the entire school board. At the meeting on February 13, 2005, the Board presented the peaceful release proposal, and Perich responded by presenting her work release note. The Board continued to express concerns about Perich’s ability to supervise students for the entire day. Perich explained that, as of her doctor’s release on February 22, 2005, she would no longer be eligible for disability coverage and would be required to return to work. The Board, however, continued to request that Perich resign and asked her to respond to the peaceful release proposal by February 21, 2005.”

So this is a matter of contract law. The teacher’s contract said she could not be dismissed without cause. The doctor said she could resume teaching with no impairment, but the Board didn’t believe the doctor...so they fired her. Does a medical condition that a doctor says is fully controlled with medication give “cause” to allow her to be fired under the terms of her contract?

If a church writes a contract, can they then ignore their contract because they are a religious organization? Would you agree to do work for a church, if they could ignore their contract with you?

All quotes from here (the court of appeals findings):

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=18241937592696289238&q=Hosanna-Tabor+Evangelical+Lutheran+Church+and+School+v.+Equal+Employment+Opportunity+Commission&hl=en&as_sdt=2,3&as_vis=1

Notice the court says that if it is a ministerial position, the church can do anything it wants. But it cites previous cases that say secular work performed in a church still falls under contract & public law.


19 posted on 10/04/2011 6:57:07 AM PDT by Mr Rogers ("they found themselves made strangers in their own country")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine; nmh; massmike
"But if the administration’s claim is approved, government-appointed judges “could impose ministers on churches against their will,” said Luke Goodrich, a legal council at the Becket Fund, a religious-liberties group."

The real targets here are threefold:

(1) forcing churches and synagogues, and their related institutions (religious schools, missions, social services, etc.) to hire or promote people who do not reflect that religious group's standards, values and beliefs

(2) Unionization of employees of faith-based groups,and having the liberal-left ideology control them through the unions;

(3) Regulatory litigation which can be turned into nonstop aggressive lawfare ahgainst every religious institution,---this gives the EEOC and other government despots the power to bankrupt any church-related group they wish to destroy.

I hope this will finally, finally moibilize the churches and synangogues to mobilize and fight back against Obamunism.

If it does, it will, paradoxically, be a good thing in the end

Oremus.

20 posted on 10/04/2011 7:26:41 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ExTexasRedhead

Our Congress is as inept and corrupt as he is.


21 posted on 10/04/2011 9:33:33 AM PDT by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: massmike
...and to make all but a few core religious jobs subject to secular employment law.

I wonder how Sharia will handle this?

After fighting to allow religious garb in the workplace, now they will be forced to accomodate the workplace requirements in religious jobs?

-PJ

22 posted on 10/04/2011 9:40:19 AM PDT by Political Junkie Too (Everyone's Irish on St. Patrick's Day, Mexican on Cinco de Mayo, and American on Election Day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massmike

Placemark for pinglist.


23 posted on 10/04/2011 8:28:23 PM PDT by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers
Shove a few queers and Satanists down the throats of Muslim mosques in this country making sure they have the right to enter the mosque and work therein in spite of their not being Muslim and then maybe I'll believe the contract law being used to shove the camels’ nose under the tent is the real issue.
24 posted on 10/04/2011 9:10:24 PM PDT by Rashputin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson