Supreme Court

What the Ministerial Exception Will Mean for Religious Employers

“The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that religious schools are allowed to fire religion teachers for any reason they wish, a major expansion of protections for religious institutions against nondiscrimination laws.” - W. Examiner

“The Supreme Court on Wednesday voted 7–2 to allow employers with sincerely held moral or religious objections an exemption from an Obama-era mandate to provide contraception in their health-care plans.” - National Review

“Conservative legal theory holds that laws need to be interpreted and applied according to their “original” or “textual” meaning. Conservative judges, unlike liberal judges, resist ‘making laws,’ which they consider to be the role of legislators….they also tend to have a high respect for ‘precedent,’ for upholding previous court rulings.

“On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in June Medical Services v. Russo that a Louisiana state law holding abortion clinics to the same standards as surgical centers was unconstitutional.” - CPost

“These failures, as noted by Senator Hawley in his speech, can quickly turn into a political liability for a Republican Party that has derived significant power from campaigning on the importance of judicial nominations. Bostock is a wake-up call…of a movement in need of change.

“Chief among them are two cases — Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru and St. James School v. Biel — that involve a ‘ministerial exemption’ to civil rights protections such as the one in Monday’s ruling, Title VII of the 1964 Civil Right Act.” - BPNews

“This week’s Supreme Court decision intended to protect gay and transgender people from workplace discrimination could infringe upon the exercise of faith, a group of religious colleges has warned.” - W.Examiner

Some quick thoughts about the Bostock v. Clayton County court decision that came out yesterday.

“The Court ruled, in an opinion written by Justice Gorsuch, that ‘sex’ does, in fact, include sexual orientation and gender identity, despite the fact that legislators repeatedly voted against including those categories in the legislation. So, what now?” - Russel Moore