It was only 8 years ago that the Supreme Court of the United States determined that the First Amendment barred a court from entertaining an employment discrimination claim brought by an elementary school teacher against the religious school where she taught, under the “ministerial exception” to laws governing the employment relationship between the parties.

In the Supreme Court’s latest decision on the ministerial exception, two women attempted to sue their religious school employers under different employment laws – the ADEA and the ADA – in the case of Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru.  One plaintiff alleged she was reduced to a part-time teaching position and eventually terminated due to her advanced age while the other was terminated after informing the school she would need leave for cancer treatment.  While both plaintiffs held the title of teacher within their organizations, neither position included the title of “minister.”  However, the teachers were involved in the religious education of students.  The plaintiffs were considered “catechists responsible for the faith formation of the students in their charge.”

The courts have long linked “faith and doctrine” to “matters of church government” and been hesitant to interfere with either.  Under the ministerial exception, courts are “bound to stay out of employment disputes involving those holding certain important positions with churches and other religious institutions.”  In the Morrissey-Berru decision, the Court explained that the exception does not cover all positions working for religious institutions, and does not apply solely based on the employee’s title, but looks at what the employee actually does within the institution.  The Court found that the employees performed “vital religious duties” within their institutions, as “[e]ducating and forming students in the Catholic faith lay at the core of the mission of the schools where they taught.”

In coming to its decision, the Court refused to create a test for lower courts to use in determining whether the ministerial exception applied to a specific set of circumstances, rather, the Court stated:

The religious education and formation of students is the very reason for the existence of most private religious schools, and therefore the selection and supervision of the teachers upon whom the schools rely to do this work lie at the core of their mission.  Judicial review of the way in which religious schools discharge those responsibilities would undermine the independence of religious institutions in a way that the First Amendment does not tolerate.

This is a decision that is clearly not as wide-ranging as other decisions we’ve discussed, but it has a huge impact on religious institutions and their employees.  Basically, as long as an employee has some significant involvement in the religious mission of an organization, courts cannot interfere with that organization’s employment decisions, no matter how discriminatory or unfair they may be.  However, the exception does not shield religious organizations from all employment laws, just those that have to do with religious institution governance.

From religious accommodation to hiring and firing, the application of the First Amendment within your organization can be incredibly difficult and costly.  If you, or your organization are in need of assistance navigating the treacherous waters of First Amendment law, contact the professionals at the Wiley Law Office, for legal advice that works.