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 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 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.edu<mailto:tcb...@stthomas.edu> SSRN: http://ssrn.com/author='261564 Weblog: http://www.mirrorofjustice.blogs.com<http://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.
