Skip to comments.Obama’s lawyers bid to regulate religious hiring
Posted on 10/04/2011 6:21:20 AM PDT by massmike
Barack Obamas 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. Thats 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 administrations 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 administrations 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 ...
We’re gonna need a bigger broom in 2012.
“Barack Obama’s Department of Justice” is an oxymoron.
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.
I swear...the Zer0 numbnuts apparently can’t even figure out the “law of holes”....
ie a Catholic priest for a Methodist church? or a Lutheran minister to the OPC?
And goodbye to the conscience clause.
Much bigger broom.
Death blow to freedom of religion and freedom of thought and speech too, come to think of it
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?
The Tyrants 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."
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.
That would be a best case scenario.
Since no “religious” exceptions would be allowed.
This is VERY dangerous and VERY unconstitutional.
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.
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.
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):
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.
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