SCOTUS to Hear Catholic School Religious Freedom Cases

Washington D.C., Dec 18, 2019 / 06:00 pm (CNA).- The U.S. Supreme Court will decide two religious freedom cases concerning Catholic schools during its upcoming term, the court announced on Wednesday, Dec. 18.

The court consolidated the cases Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru and St. James Catholic School v. Biel, and will consider them together.

Both lawsuits concern teachers at Catholic schools who did not have their contracts renewed, apparently after poor performance. In one case, a teacher sued, claiming age discrimination, and in the other, sued claiming that she was discriminated against rights established by the Americans with Disabilities Act.

“Parents trust Catholic schools to assist them in one of their most important duties: forming the faith of their children,” Montserrat Alvarado, vice president and executive director at Becket, the law firm providing counsel in both cases, said in a statement to CNA.

“If courts can second-guess a Catholic school’s judgment about who should teach religious beliefs to fifth graders, then neither Catholics nor any other religious group can be confident in their ability to convey the faith to the next generation,” she added.

The “ministerial exception,” which permits a church or school to hire and fire teachers to their liking, was expanded in the 2012 Supreme Court decision Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC. In that decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the firing of a teacher at a Lutheran school was not unlawful due to the religious nature of the school.

In the cases in question, courts disagreed that the teachers were in “ministerial” roles at the school. In the Our Lady of Guadalupe School case, Agnes Morrissey-Berru, a teacher at the school in Hermosa Beach, CA, taught religion and led students in prayer. In 2015, her teaching contract expired and was not renewed. She claimed her contract......

Patriots are reminded that the only age protection for ordinary citizens that the states have amended the Constitution to expressly protect is limited to voting rights issues, evidenced by the 26th Amendment.

"26th Amendment:
Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are 18 years of age or older, to vote, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of age."
Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation [emphasis added]."
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.

Also, federal employee and military personnel issues aside, while I support such laws in principle, it remains that the states have never expressly constitutionally given the feds the specific power to protect disabled Americans.

Consider that constitutionally low-information career federal lawmakers probably make constitutionally indefensible rights laws to help get themselves reelected, unconstitutionally expanding the already unconstitutionally big federal government’s powers by doing so.

Corrections, insights welcome.

Remember in November!

MAGA! Now KAGA! (Keep America Great Always!)

There’s a big difference between an employee being fired/let go, and a contract expiring and not being renewed. Neither of these ladies should have any expectation of the contract auto-renewing. This case should have nothing to do with these being religious schools or disabilities, or anything. Basic contract law: once it expires, it’s over. Unless the contract itself auto-renews, there is nothing there once it expires.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.