The most interesting part of the decision is of course what the Court did not decide: who decides who is a minister in less obvious situations. I don't take Thomas' solo concurrence advocating near complete deference to church officials as indicating he is the only justice who may vote that way; rather, simply that reaching that issue was unnecessary to get a unanimous opinion. In that Alito and Kagan are in "opposite camps" and they jointly offer a functional approach may say something about those in the middle, but I find their criteria too narrow to be a comprehensive statement. I think others may lean toward Thomas.
Steve -- Steven K. Green, J.D., Ph.D. Fred H. Paulus Professor of Law and Director Center for Religion, Law and Democracy Willamette University 900 State St., S.E. Salem, Oregon 97301 503-370-6732 On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Rick Garnett <rgarn...@nd.edu> wrote: > Dear Marci,**** > > ** ** > > I guess not, but I think people usually think of “clergy” as ordained, or > as otherwise officially designated. I think the opinion constitutionalizes > an exception that covers a broader category of “ministers” (including, of > course, many lay teachers at parochial schools, who are not usually > referred to as “clergy.”).**** > > ** ** > > Best wishes,**** > > ** ** > > Rick**** > > ** ** > > Richard W. Garnett**** > > Professor of Law and Associate Dean**** > > Notre Dame Law School**** > > P.O. Box 780**** > > Notre Dame, Indiana 46556-0780**** > > ** ** > > 574-631-6981 (w)**** > > 574-276-2252 (cell)**** > > ** ** > > SSRN page <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=342235> > **** > > ** ** > > Blogs:**** > > ** ** > > Prawfsblawg <http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/>**** > > Mirror of Justice <http://www.mirrorofjustice.blogs.com/>**** > > Law, Religion, and Ethics <http://lawreligionethics.net/>**** > > ** ** > > *From:* religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto: > religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] *On Behalf Of *Marci Hamilton > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 11, 2012 2:26 PM > *To:* Law & Religion issues for Law Academics > *Subject:* Re: Supreme Court sides with church on decision to fire > employee on religious grounds**** > > ** ** > > Rick-- I meant by clergy whatever the Court is saying is a "minister" > I did not intend "ordained" clergy.**** > > Do we still disagree?**** > > ** ** > > Marci**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > On Jan 11, 2012, at 2:16 PM, Rick Garnett wrote:**** > > > > **** > > Dear Marci,**** > > **** > > I think you are right about the second sentence, but I disagree with your > second. The opinion seems clearly to reach beyond “clergy.” **** > > **** > > Best wishes,**** > > **** > > Rick**** > > **** > > Richard W. Garnett**** > > Professor of Law and Associate Dean**** > > Notre Dame Law School**** > > P.O. Box 780**** > > Notre Dame, Indiana 46556-0780**** > > **** > > 574-631-6981 (w)**** > > 574-276-2252 (cell)**** > > **** > > SSRN page <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=342235> > **** > > **** > > Blogs:**** > > **** > > Prawfsblawg <http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/>**** > > Mirror of Justice <http://www.mirrorofjustice.blogs.com/>**** > > Law, Religion, and Ethics <http://lawreligionethics.net/>**** > > **** > > *From:* religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto: > religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] *On Behalf Of *Marci Hamilton > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 11, 2012 12:34 PM > *To:* Law & Religion issues for Law Academics > *Subject:* Re: Supreme Court sides with church on decision to fire > employee on religious grounds**** > > **** > > The decision is much narrower than Joel's description. It does not cover > all employees of religious organizations--only clergy. And it only > involves claims involving discrimination against the religious organization, > **** > > leaving open litigation from even clergy on contract and tort theories. * > *** > > **** > > Marci**** > > **** > > **** > > **** > > On Jan 11, 2012, at 12:26 PM, Joel wrote:**** > > > > > **** > > **** > > The Supreme Court has sided unanimously with a church sued for firing an > employee on religious grounds, issuing an opinion on Wednesday that > religious employers can keep the government out of hiring and firing > decisions.**** > > **** > > In the case of Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC, Cheryl Perich, a "called" teacher, > argued that the Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School of > Redford, Mich., had discriminated against her under the Americans With > Disabilities Act by refusing to reinstate her to her job after she took > leave for narcolepsy.**** > > **** > > **** > > > http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01/11/supreme-court-sides-with-church-on-decision-to-fire-employee-on-religious/ > **** > > **** > > **** > > Joel L. Sogol**** > > Attorney at Law**** > > 811 21st Ave.**** > > Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35401**** > > ph (205) 345-0966**** > > fx (205) 345-0971**** > > email: jlsa...@wwisp.com**** > > website: www.joelsogol.com**** > > Ben Franklin observed that truth wins a fair fight - which is why we have > evidence rules in U.S. courts.**** > > **** > > _______________________________________________ > To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > > Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as > private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are > posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or > wrongly) forward the messages to others.**** > > **** > > _______________________________________________ > To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > > Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as > private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are > posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or > wrongly) forward the messages to others.**** > > ** ** > > _______________________________________________ > To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > > Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as > private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are > posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or > wrongly) forward the messages to others. >
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
