"No US court has jurisdiction over how the Church treats its priests or due process within the Church."
Wrong (again). Labor laws Deacon. There is another "free" clue for you. Go buy another one. Corporate law governs how corporations operate. If a corporation ignores it's own bylaws, it can be found to be acting "Ultra Vires". That can strip the corporate protection from the Bishop and make him personally liable for civil rights violations of his employees. Why did the Bp. suspend Fr. Z? God knows, we don't, but it is very likely that his medical and pension benefits are partly at issue. Those issues are governed by both Canon Law and Civil Law. Again your assertion fails, totally and completely. Get help.
Name me one instance where a church of any denomination has ever been prosecuted for violating its own internal canons?
Governments do not interfere in the inner-workings of churches, narses.
You are arguing hypotheticals, and I'm arguing reality.
Uhhhnnnh...limited agreement here.
If the Church is using a qualified 401(k), or fixed-benefit, or fixed-contribution pension plan, then certain protections are given individuals who are the beneficiaries of the plan. (Weakland tried threatening priests by telling them that he could "cut off their pension."--On consult with attorneys, Weakie was laughed out of the room.)
It is less clear that 'other' US laws apply, such as EEO; in fact, the 'separation' clause argument would likely prevail in questions such as 'female priests,' or (we should hope for the day!!) 'queer' priest-ordinations.
IOW, if it's not strictly a secular transaction, the courts will most likely keep their hands off. That's why you brought up the UCC provisions of corporations--those are strictly secular transactions/actions (eg, Chapter 11/7.)