Above the law? The constitutionality of the ministerial exemption from antidiscrimination law

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

21 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This Article critiques the constitutional underpinnings of the "ministerial exemption," which grants religious organizations immunity from discrimination suits brought by "ministerial" employees. These employees, who range from parochial schoolteachers to church music directors, cannot assert Title VII race or sex discrimination claims against their religious employers - regardless of whether or not religious belief motivated the discrimination. Lower courts and commentators assert that the right of church autonomy created by the religion clauses requires this result, but the Supreme Court has never blessed (nor rejected) it. This Article argues there is no place for the ministerial exemption under the Supreme Court's current religion clause jurisprudence. The free exercise clause neither guarantees religious organizations autonomy in their internal affairs nor shields them from neutral laws of general applicability like Title VII. And while the establishment clause forbids courts from resolving theological or spiritual disputes, this Article rejects the unexplored assumption that adjudicating a Title VII suit requires courts to evaluate a plaintiff's spiritual qualifications. The Article also briefly explores freedom of expressive association as an alternative justification for the ministerial exemption and concludes that, to the extent it applies at all, it only protects those employers whose religious doctrine requires discrimination.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1965-2038
Number of pages74
JournalFordham Law Review
Volume75
Issue number4
StatePublished - Mar 1 2007
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

constitutionality
exemption
affirmative action
discrimination
Law
Supreme Court
employer
church
autonomy
Religion
employee
freedom of association
immunity
jurisprudence
qualification
grant
doctrine
director
guarantee
music

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Law

Cite this

Above the law? The constitutionality of the ministerial exemption from antidiscrimination law. / Corbin, Caroline.

In: Fordham Law Review, Vol. 75, No. 4, 01.03.2007, p. 1965-2038.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{2c6bec6285554df9a48fdee988d0957c,
title = "Above the law? The constitutionality of the ministerial exemption from antidiscrimination law",
abstract = "This Article critiques the constitutional underpinnings of the {"}ministerial exemption,{"} which grants religious organizations immunity from discrimination suits brought by {"}ministerial{"} employees. These employees, who range from parochial schoolteachers to church music directors, cannot assert Title VII race or sex discrimination claims against their religious employers - regardless of whether or not religious belief motivated the discrimination. Lower courts and commentators assert that the right of church autonomy created by the religion clauses requires this result, but the Supreme Court has never blessed (nor rejected) it. This Article argues there is no place for the ministerial exemption under the Supreme Court's current religion clause jurisprudence. The free exercise clause neither guarantees religious organizations autonomy in their internal affairs nor shields them from neutral laws of general applicability like Title VII. And while the establishment clause forbids courts from resolving theological or spiritual disputes, this Article rejects the unexplored assumption that adjudicating a Title VII suit requires courts to evaluate a plaintiff's spiritual qualifications. The Article also briefly explores freedom of expressive association as an alternative justification for the ministerial exemption and concludes that, to the extent it applies at all, it only protects those employers whose religious doctrine requires discrimination.",
author = "Caroline Corbin",
year = "2007",
month = "3",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "75",
pages = "1965--2038",
journal = "Fordham Law Review",
issn = "0015-704X",
publisher = "Fordham University School of Law",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Above the law? The constitutionality of the ministerial exemption from antidiscrimination law

AU - Corbin, Caroline

PY - 2007/3/1

Y1 - 2007/3/1

N2 - This Article critiques the constitutional underpinnings of the "ministerial exemption," which grants religious organizations immunity from discrimination suits brought by "ministerial" employees. These employees, who range from parochial schoolteachers to church music directors, cannot assert Title VII race or sex discrimination claims against their religious employers - regardless of whether or not religious belief motivated the discrimination. Lower courts and commentators assert that the right of church autonomy created by the religion clauses requires this result, but the Supreme Court has never blessed (nor rejected) it. This Article argues there is no place for the ministerial exemption under the Supreme Court's current religion clause jurisprudence. The free exercise clause neither guarantees religious organizations autonomy in their internal affairs nor shields them from neutral laws of general applicability like Title VII. And while the establishment clause forbids courts from resolving theological or spiritual disputes, this Article rejects the unexplored assumption that adjudicating a Title VII suit requires courts to evaluate a plaintiff's spiritual qualifications. The Article also briefly explores freedom of expressive association as an alternative justification for the ministerial exemption and concludes that, to the extent it applies at all, it only protects those employers whose religious doctrine requires discrimination.

AB - This Article critiques the constitutional underpinnings of the "ministerial exemption," which grants religious organizations immunity from discrimination suits brought by "ministerial" employees. These employees, who range from parochial schoolteachers to church music directors, cannot assert Title VII race or sex discrimination claims against their religious employers - regardless of whether or not religious belief motivated the discrimination. Lower courts and commentators assert that the right of church autonomy created by the religion clauses requires this result, but the Supreme Court has never blessed (nor rejected) it. This Article argues there is no place for the ministerial exemption under the Supreme Court's current religion clause jurisprudence. The free exercise clause neither guarantees religious organizations autonomy in their internal affairs nor shields them from neutral laws of general applicability like Title VII. And while the establishment clause forbids courts from resolving theological or spiritual disputes, this Article rejects the unexplored assumption that adjudicating a Title VII suit requires courts to evaluate a plaintiff's spiritual qualifications. The Article also briefly explores freedom of expressive association as an alternative justification for the ministerial exemption and concludes that, to the extent it applies at all, it only protects those employers whose religious doctrine requires discrimination.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34247467624&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34247467624&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:34247467624

VL - 75

SP - 1965

EP - 2038

JO - Fordham Law Review

JF - Fordham Law Review

SN - 0015-704X

IS - 4

ER -