From the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
Excerpt: (most links removed)
The Supreme Court hasĀ rejectedĀ the Obama administrationās argument that it can dictate who churches hire as ministers or clergy inĀ Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and SchoolĀ v.Ā Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The Obama administration unsuccessfullyĀ arguedthat the government can dictate who churches hire, as long as it also subjects secular employers to the same dictates regarding who they hire (so-called rules of general applicability). Taken to its logical conclusion, this argument would allow the government to ban a church or synagogue from hiring based on religion (defeating the whole purpose of religious freedom, which is to allow churches to promote their own religion) or sex (preventing the Catholic Church from having a male priesthood).Ā NoĀ Supreme Court justice bought the administrationās argument, made on behalf of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The Supreme Court unanimously found that such government control over who churches can hire would violate the religion clauses of the First Amendment.
If federal antidiscrimination laws covered churchesā hiring of clergy, as the Obama administration demanded, they would have to not just avoid discriminating based on things like sex or religion, but would also have to radically alter sensible hiring criteria by eliminating longstanding, neutral church practices that have the affect of inadvertently screening out more members of a minority group than of other groups (so-called ādisparate impactā or āunintentional discriminationā). For example, some branches of the Lutheran Church have hiring criteria for religious broadcasters on their radio programs, such as āknowledge of Lutheran doctrine,ā and āclassic music training,ā that few minorities satisfy (only 2 percent of all people with Lutheran training are minorities, and only 0.1 percent of people with both Lutheran training and classical music training are minorities), given the Lutheran Churchās historical roots in overwhelmingly white areas like Scandinavia and Minnesota. Even though they are happy to have black applicants, and do not treat black applicants worse based on their race, the EEOC could easily sue them for racially disparate impact if the Obama administrationās argument had been accepted. (The religion clauses of the First Amendment not only protect who churches hire as ministers, but also other people who serve as āvoices of the church,ā such asĀ theology professors, and religious broadcasters on behalf of a church.)
We previously wrote about ways that the Obama administration isĀ attackingĀ religious freedom and separation of church and stateĀ at this link. We described how the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission isĀ wiping out jobsĀ andĀ discouraging hiringĀ and job creation throughĀ onerous interpretationsĀ of federal employment laws,Ā at this link.
Good news for religious liberty means bad news for Barack Obama.