Perich claimed that she was fired illegally out of retaliation for threatening to take legal action. But Hosanna-Tabor said that Perich was dismissed on religious grounds because she acted against the church’s commitment to internal dispute resolution.
Perich argued that her firing violated the Americans with Disabilities Act, and filed a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which sued Hosanna-Tabor.
In its defense, Hosanna-Tabor invoked the “ministerial exception,” a principle drawn from the religion clauses of the First Amendment. It allows religious groups to make employment decisions free of government intervention.
The Supreme Court sided with Hosanna-Tabor in its Jan. 11 ruling, observing that requiring a church to keep an unwanted minister “interferes with the internal governance of the church” by preventing it from selecting “those who will personify its beliefs.”
The decision was centered around the designation of Perich as a “minister,” a finding that was rejected by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in an earlier ruling.
The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the “ministerial exception is not limited to the head of a religious congregation” but applied to Perich’s position as well.
In making its decision, the court noted that the Hosanna-Tabor employed both “lay teachers” and “called teachers.” Perich was employed as a “called teacher,” meaning she was regarded as having been called to the position by God.
In addition, the court observed that Perich was “commissioned as a minister” and that she taught religion classes in addition to secular subjects. She also led students in regular prayer and devotional exercises.
Rienzi said the ruling could have far-reaching consequences.
He said that the Obama administration has consistently held a “stingy view” of what qualifies as religion under the law.
This view is exemplified in the very narrow religious exemption permitted by the Health and Human Services mandate requiring health insurance providers to cover contraception, he said.
By unanimously upholding the rights of religious groups, the court has struck a “very big blow” to the administration’s narrow definition of religion, which it described as “extreme,” “remarkable” and “untenable,” Rienzi said.
Subscribe to our daily newsletter
At Catholic News Agency, our team is committed to reporting the truth with courage, integrity, and fidelity to our faith. We provide news about the Church and the world, as seen through the teachings of the Catholic Church. When you subscribe to the CNA UPDATE, we'll send you a daily email with links to the news you need and, occasionally, breaking news.
As part of this free service you may receive occasional offers from us at EWTN News and EWTN. We won't rent or sell your information, and you can unsubscribe at any time.
He explained that the decision could have “ripple effects” as courts continue to examine the contraception mandate and other decisions by the Obama administration dealing with the freedom of religious organizations.
Bottom of Form
Bishop William E. Lori of Bridgeport, chairman of the U.S. bishops’ ad hoc Committee on Religious Liberty, hailed the court’s decision as “a victory for religious liberty and the U.S. Constitution.”
“Freedom of Religion is America’s First Freedom and the Court has spoken unanimously in favor of it,” he said. “The Founding Fathers would be proud.”
Bishop Lori said that the ruling “makes resoundingly clear the historical and constitutional importance of keeping internal church affairs off limits to the government.”
He observed that the ability of churches to choose their ministers is important because “whoever chooses the minister chooses the message.”
“It is a great day for the First Amendment,” he said.