Thanks for this, Tom. Forgive me, all, if there has already been a big
discussion of this case, which I missed, responding to Tom's post. It *does*
strike me, for what it's worth, that it is time for the Court to weigh in on
the many interesting (and difficult) questions that the ministerial exception
raises, e.g., how do we identify the positions to which the exception applies,
does the exception apply without regard to the reasons (if any) for the
challenged conduct, and what is the constitutional basis (Free Exercise?
Church Autonomy? Establishment? Something else?) for the exception?
Best, 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 pagehttp://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=342235
Blogs:
Prawfsblawghttp://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/
Mirror of Justicehttp://www.mirrorofjustice.blogs.com/
Law, Religion, and Ethicshttp://lawreligionethics.net/
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Berg, Thomas C.
Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2010 1:51 PM
To: Religionlaw
Subject: Ministerial Exception Cert Petition
The Becket Fund and Doug Laycock have filed a cert. petition in Hosanna-Tabor
Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC, raising the question [w]hether
the ministerial exception applies to a teacher at a religious elementary school
who teaches the full secular curriculum, but also teaches daily religion
classes, is a commissioned minister, and regularly leads students in prayer and
worship. See the links at Howard Friedman's Religion Clause blog,
http://religionclause.blogspot.com/2010/10/cert-petition-filed-in-ministerial.html.
The petition makes the case that ignoring the teacher's clergy-type duties on
the ground that her primary duties were to teach secular classes is
unconstitutional, and that the courts of appeals are divided on how to
determine whether the ministerial exception applies to a given employee.
Eugene commended the petition's quality,
http://volokh.com/2010/10/28/antidiscrimination-laws-and-religious-organizations,
but I don't know what he thinks about the merits. Rick Garnett called it one
of the most important religious freedom cases in years.
http://mirrorofjustice.blogs.com/mirrorofjustice/2010/11/one-of-the-most-important-religious-freedom-cases-in-years.html
And Marci has referred to the case among others in arguing that the Court
ought to take a case to define the ministerial exception.
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20100722.html.
Seems like a case worth discussing. Thoughts from anyone on the list,
including any of these folks?
-
Thomas C. Berg
St. Ives Professor of Law, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs
University of St. Thomas School of Law
MSL 400, 1000 LaSalle Avenue
Minneapolis, MN 55403-2015
Phone: (651) 962-4918
Fax: (651) 962-4996
E-mail: tcb...@stthomas.edumailto:tcb...@stthomas.edu
SSRN: http://ssrn.com/author='261564
Weblog:
http://www.mirrorofjustice.blogs.comhttp://www.mirrorofjustice.blogs.com/mirrorofjustice
___
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.
