TRENTON – The Supreme Court of New Jersey today protected an Orthodox Jewish school’s freedom to choose who carries out its religious mission. In Hyman v. Rosenbaum Yeshiva of North Jersey, a New Jersey Orthodox Jewish school announced it had parted ways with a rabbi who it said violated Jewish law by allegedly interacting inappropriately with his elementary-age female students. The rabbi then sued the school, arguing that he had been defamed. Becket filed a brief on behalf of Serbian Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Romanian Orthodox, and Antiochian Orthodox church bodies to explain the importance of allowing religious groups to select, control, and discipline their leaders without undue government interference.   

Rosenbaum Yeshiva of North Jersey is a Jewish day school in River Edge, NJ. The school exists to help young Jewish men and women excel academically while remaining committed to Torah learning and Orthodox Jewish traditions. After concluding that one of its teachers, Rabbi Shlomo Hyman, allegedly interacted inappropriately with female students, the school ended his contract and wrote a letter to parents informing them of the Yeshiva’s decision. Hyman then filed a lawsuit in state court, claiming he was defamed, and that the Yeshiva should have to defend its religious decision to a court.   

“Judges have no business picking Jewish rabbis or Orthodox priests,” said Laura Wolk Slavis, counsel at Becket. “The court’s ruling reinforces that common-sense principle, allowing Rosenbaum Yeshiva to choose who passes on its Jewish beliefs to the next generation.”  

Becket’s brief explained which kinds of claims fall under the ministerial exception, a legal protection that ensures that religious groups can select and govern their ministers free from any government interference. While some claims fall outside the exception—like a priest who sues a bishop for punching him in the face—it protects religious groups from defamation claims like those alleged by Rabbi Hyman, which do nothing more than ask a court to second-guess how a religious school chose to discipline one of its ministers.  

“Religious schools should not have to fear being dragged into court when making decisions that seek to protect children in their care,” said Wolk Slavis. “The Justices ensured that this freedom is upheld for Jews and for people of all faiths across the Garden State.”  

Hyman has 90 days to appeal the decision to the United States Supreme Court.  

For more information or to arrange an interview with a Becket attorney, contact Ryan Colby at media@becketlaw.org or 202-349-7219.   

WASHINGTON – A group of Eastern Orthodox churches was at the Supreme Court of New Jersey today to support an Orthodox Jewish school’s freedom to choose who carries out its religious mission. In Hyman v. Rosenbaum Yeshiva of North Jersey, a New Jersey Orthodox Jewish school announced it had parted ways with a rabbi who allegedly violated Jewish law by engaging in inappropriate conduct with his elementary-age female students. The rabbi then sued the school, arguing that he had been defamed. Becket filed a brief on behalf of Serbian Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Romanian Orthodox, and Antiochian Orthodox church bodies to explain the importance of allowing religious groups to select, control, and discipline their leaders without the government butting in.

Rosenbaum Yeshiva of North Jersey is a Jewish day school in River Edge, NJ. The school exists to help young Jewish men and women excel academically while remaining committed to Torah learning and Orthodox Jewish traditions. After concluding that one of its teachers, Rabbi Shlomo Hyman, allegedly made inappropriate contact with female students, the school ended his contract and wrote a letter to parents informing them of the Yeshiva’s decision. Hyman then filed a lawsuit in state court, claiming he was defamed, and that the Yeshiva should have to defend its religious decision to a court.

“New Jersey courts have no business meddling in decisions about who is best to serve as a Jewish Rabbi or an Orthodox Christian priest,” said Laura Wolk Slavis, counsel at Becket. “This bedrock religious freedom has existed since the founding and should not even be in question.” 

Becket’s brief explains which kinds of claims fall under the ministerial exception, a legal protection that ensures that religious groups can select and govern their ministers free from any government interference. While some claims fall outside the exception—like a priest who sues a bishop for punching him in the face—it protects religious groups from defamation claims like those alleged by Rabbi Hyman, which do nothing more than ask a court to second-guess how a religious school chose to discipline one of its ministers. At the hearing today, Becket attorney Laura Wolk Slavis argued on behalf of the Eastern Orthodox churches.

“Religious groups should have the power to make decisions that seek to protect the children in their care,” said Slavis. “We asked the Justices to protect that common-sense right for Rosenbaum Yeshiva and all other faith-based institutions in New Jersey.” 

A decision is expected later this year.

For more information or to arrange an interview with a Becket attorney, contact Ryan Colby at media@becketlaw.org or 202-349-7219. 

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court of New Jersey today protected the ability of religious schools to make key choices about matters of faith, doctrine, and internal governance without courts getting involved. In Crisitello v. St. Theresa School, a former teacher at a Catholic school in New Jersey sued the school, which is part of the Archdiocese of Newark, after the school did not offer her a new contract because she had violated both her previous contract and Catholic teaching. Becket argued the case to the New Jersey Supreme Court on behalf of Agudath Israel of America, a national Orthodox Jewish umbrella organization that represents the interests of many Orthodox Jewish schools in New Jersey. Today the court ruled that religious schools throughout the state are free to decide who should carry out their ministries of passing on the faith to the next generation.

The Archdiocese of Newark operates St. Theresa School, which has served families in the town of Kenilworth, New Jersey, for over sixty years. Since the late 1970s, it has been run by Salesian Sisters who strive to offer their students a faith-centered education inspired by the teachings of St. John Bosco. To ensure that ministry remains strong, St. Theresa—like all other schools in the Archdiocese—requires all its staff to respect and promote the Church’s teachings. For this reason, all staff must sign an agreement to uphold the teachings of the Catholic Church in both their professional and private lives—serving as examples of the faith to both the students and the community alike. This is similar to the practices of many other religious schools in New Jersey, including Orthodox Jewish schools. 

“Teachers make the school,” said Eric Rassbach, vice president and senior counsel at Becket, who argued the case to the New Jersey Supreme Court. “The whole point of a religious school is to help parents educate their children in their faith. And to do that, schools must have teachers who believe in and follow their faith.” 

During the 2013 school year, a teacher named Victoria Crisitello voluntarily told St. Theresa that she was in violation of Church teaching and the Code of Ethics she had agreed to when she was hired. The school therefore declined to offer her a new contract for the following school year. Soon after, Crisitello filed suit. 

Becket intervened in the case on behalf of Agudath Israel of America, a national Orthodox Jewish umbrella organization, and argued the appeal to the New Jersey Supreme Court in April 2023. In briefing and at the oral argument, Becket explained that church autonomy—which provides religious groups the power to decide matters of faith, doctrine, and internal governance—protects Orthodox Jewish schools and other religious schools. Today the court, in a unanimous opinion, held that under New Jersey law, “The religious tenets exception allowed St. Theresa’s to require its employees, as a condition of employment, to abide by Catholic law.” 

“This decision is a victory for all religious schools in the state of New Jersey, but it is especially important for Orthodox Jews,” said Rassbach. “There are too many examples in history of governments interfering with Jewish schools, or worse. Today the Court did the right thing for Orthodox Jews and all other New Jerseyans by stopping this attempt to drag government into direct control of religious schools.”   

For more information or to arrange an interview with a Becket attorney, contact Ryan Colby at media@becketlaw.org or 202-349-7219. Interviews can be arranged in English, Mandarin, French, German, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish.  

WASHINGTON – The Indiana Supreme Court just unanimously protected the Archdiocese of Indianapolis’ right to ensure students and families receive an authentic Catholic education. In Payne-Elliott v. Archdiocese of Indianapolis, the state’s highest court upheld religious institutions’ ability to choose the religious values that they will pass on to the next generation.  

Catholic school teachers in the Archdiocese of Indianapolis sign an agreement to uphold the teachings of the Catholic Church in word and deed. In 2017, Joshua Payne-Elliott, who taught at Cathedral Catholic High School in Indianapolis, entered a same-sex union in violation of both his employment agreement and Catholic teaching. After an extensive period of discernment and dialogue with the Archdiocese of Indianapolis, it was made clear to Cathedral that it needed to require teachers to uphold Church teaching to remain affiliated with the Catholic Church. After Cathedral separated from Mr. Payne-Elliott and provided him with a settlement, he sued the Archdiocese.  

“Courts can’t decide what it means to be Catholic—only the Church can do that,” said Luke Goodrich, VP & senior counsel at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. “By keeping the judiciary out of religious identity, the Indiana Supreme Court just protected all religious institutions to be free from government interference in deciding their core religious values.” 

An Indiana trial court originally dismissed the lawsuit in favor of the archdiocese, but Payne-Elliot appealed the decision. After the Indiana Court of Appeals reinstated the lawsuit, the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty asked the Indiana Supreme Court to review the case. 

Today, the Indiana Supreme Court upheld the Archdiocese’s religious autonomy from state interference in sensitive internal religious decisions. As Justice Slaughter’s opinion explained, the “Constitution encompasses the right of religious institutions to decide for themselves, free from state interference, matters of church government.” This ensures that all religious organizations can freely govern themselves in accordance with their beliefs.  

“The court’s decision today was a commonsense ruling in favor of our most fundamental rights,” said Goodrich. “Religious schools will only be able to pass down the faith to the next generation if they can freely receive guidance from their churches on what their faith is. We are grateful the court recognized this healthy form of separation of church and state.” 

For more information or to arrange an interview, contact Ryan Colby at media@becketlaw.org or 202-349-7219. Interviews can be arranged in English, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish. 

WASHINGTON – The Chicago-based Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed the freedom of religious schools to choose leaders who will uphold their core religious teachings. In Starkey v. Roncalli High School and Archdiocese of Indianapolis, a former co-director of guidance at a Catholic high school sued the Archdiocese after her contract was not renewed because she entered a same-sex union in violation of her contract and Catholic teaching. The court ruled that the lawsuit must be dismissed, because the Constitution forbids the government from interfering with a religious school’s selection of who will pass on the faith to students.  

Roncalli High School in Indianapolis asks its teachers, administrators, and guidance counselors to sign a contract agreeing to uphold Catholic Church teachings in both their professional and personal lives. In August 2018, Lynn Starkey told Roncalli leadership that she was in a same-sex union in violation of her contract and centuries-old Catholic teaching. The school then explained that it could not renew her contract in light of her not conforming to Catholic teaching. Ms. Starkey sued both Roncalli and the Archdiocese, arguing that they had discriminated against her based on her sexual orientation. 

“Religious groups have a constitutional right to hire individuals who believe in their faith’s ideals and are committed to their religious mission,” said Luke Goodrich, vice president and senior counsel at Becket. “Our justice system has consistently ruled that the government cannot intrude on a religious organization’s choice of who will pass on the faith to the next generation.” 

In its opinion, the Seventh Circuit looked to the Supreme Court’s decisions in Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru and Hosanna-Tabor Lutheran Evangelical School v. EEOC, which protect churches and religious institutions from government interference. Both are prior Becket cases, and both recognize the principle of the “ministerial exception”—the right of religious organizations to choose who will carry out their religious responsibilities.  

“Catholic schools are tasked by the Church to uphold the dignity of every human person and teach the fullness of the Catholic faith,” said Goodrich. “The Seventh Circuit’s decision ensures that religious schools can remain faithful to their mission.” 

For more information or to arrange an interview with a Becket attorney, contact Ryan Colby at media@becketlaw.org or 202-349-7219. Interviews can be arranged in English, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish.

WASHINGTON – The Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit heard oral arguments in Starkey v. Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Indianapolis today, a case that will decide whether the government can overturn a private Catholic school’s selection of its own religious leaders. The former Co-Director of Guidance at Roncalli High School sued the school and the Archdiocese after her contract was not renewed because she entered a same-sex union in violation of her contract and Church teaching. A federal district court threw out the lawsuit, concluding that the constitution prohibits the government from forcing the Catholic Church to hire educators who reject Catholic teachings. But the former guidance counselor appealed. 

 “The Supreme Court has long recognized that the Constitution protects the freedom of religious schools to choose their leaders without government interference,” said Luke Goodrich, vice president and senior counsel at Becket. “If the First Amendment means anything, it means the government can’t punish the Catholic Church for asking Catholic school educators to support Catholic teaching.” 

Parents who send their children to Roncalli High School trust the school to provide a first-class education guided by the Catholic faith.  Schoolteachers, administrators, and guidance counselors at Roncalli sign contracts agreeing to support the school’s religious mission and uphold the Catholic Church’s teachings in their personal and professional lives.  

Lynn Starkey formerly taught religion classes and led the school’s choir, where she helped students prepare music for Mass. After several years, she was elevated to a key leadership role in the school, where she supervised the Guidance Department and served on the school’s Administrative Counsel, helping guide the school’s religious mission. In 2019, the school declined to renew her contract after she informed the principal that she had entered a same-sex union in violation of her contract and Church teaching. In response, Ms. Starkey sued the Archdiocese alleging employment discrimination based on sexual orientation.  

However, the Supreme Court has long recognized that the Constitution bars the state from second-guessing the leadership decisions of religious organizations, including religious schools. The Supreme Court recently ruled in Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru that schools like Roncalli have a right to make such hiring and firing decisions without government interference. Moreover, in Title VII, Congress included an explicit religious exemption designed to allow religious organizations like Catholic schools to create and maintain communities dedicated to their beliefs and practices. 

“Many parents choose Catholic schools because they trust those schools to teach their children the faith in word and deed,” said Goodrich. “If Catholic schools can’t ask their teachers and leaders to support Catholic teaching, it undermines the entire mission of the school. We’re glad the district court recognized this common-sense principle, and we expect the Seventh Circuit to do the same.”  

Wooton Hoy LLC is co-counsel in the case. 

A press call will be held today at 1 p.m. ET.

Press Call Information:
Dial 312-626-6799 (Meeting ID: 849 8489 2727) or
join https://us06web.zoom.us/j/84984892727
Email media@becketlaw.org with questions  

For more information or to arrange an interview with a Becket attorney, contact Ryan Colby at media@becketlaw.org or 202-349-7219. Interviews can be arranged in English, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish. 

WASHINGTON– Becket has just released Season 2 of Stream of Conscience, its highly acclaimed religious liberty podcast. In this brand-new season, hosts Katie Geary and Dr. Angela Wu Howard lead listeners on a deep dive into religious liberty’s fundamental constitutional components—the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause—and explore religious freedom in relation to other fundamental rights like the freedom of speech and the right to property. Over the coming months, Becket will release a total of ten new episodes, each featuring a case with lasting impact on religious freedom in America. 

In Season 2, Katie Geary and Dr. Angela Wu Howard bring to bear their collective expertise representing Americans of all faiths and telling their stories in the public square. The episodes include interviews with Americans who have put everything on the line to defend their First Amendment rights, the attorneys who have represented them, and experts in constitutional law. 

“Over the past decade, the Supreme Court has demonstrated a strong appetite for protecting Religious Freedom, setting critical precedents that benefit people of all faiths, and even people of no faith at all. There’s never been a more opportune time to dive into our First Freedom and learn more about its importance to every day Americans like you and me,” said Montse Alvarado, Vice President and Executive Director of Becket. “Stream of Conscience is designed to be thought provoking for everyone—from the veteran Supreme Court advocate to the student exploring religious freedom for the first time.” 

 The first three episodes will include: 

• How the Lemon Test Soured the First Amendment. A look at how the meaning of the Establishment Clause was distorted—from its original purpose of preventing the establishment of a state-sponsored church, to a misunderstood “wall” keeping religion out of the public square—and how the Supreme Court is setting the record straight. 

• Live Where You Serve. How one church in Chicago’s South Side provides a powerful example of the importance of a federal tax credit for the pastors who live among and serve underprivileged communities, and why it’s perfectly constitutional under the Establishment Clause.   

• Why Won’t You Be my Neighbor? When a growing Chabad attempted to build a new synagogue and center, a small but vocal opposition used the court system to block its efforts—until Becket stepped in to correct the course.

An early, bonus episode of Stream of Conscience Season 2 was released on Tuesday, featuring the history of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, championed by Becket’s 2021 Canterbury Medal recipient, Senator Orrin G. Hatch.  

Episodes of Stream of Conscience Season 2 will premiere on a bimonthly basis and will be available for download on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, and Spotify.

For more information or to arrange an interview with a Becket attorney, contact Ryan Colby at media@becketlaw.org or 202-349-7219. Interviews can be arranged in English, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish.

Becket is a non-profit, public-interest law firm dedicated to protecting the free expression of all religious traditions and has a 100% win-rate before the United States Supreme Court. For over 25 years, it has successfully defended clients of all faiths, including Buddhists, Christians, Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Native Americans, Sikhs, and Zoroastrians (read more here). 

WASHINGTON – A federal judge ruled today in favor of the Archdiocese of Indianapolis, reaffirming its right to provide students and families with an authentic Catholic education. In Starkey v. Roncalli High School and Archdiocese of Indianapolis, a former co-director of guidance at a Catholic high school sued the Archdiocese after her contract was not renewed because she entered a same-sex union in violation of her contract and of centuries-old Catholic teaching. Becket defended the Archdiocese, arguing that the government is constitutionally prohibited from forcing the Catholic Church to hire educators who reject Catholic teachings while serving in roles entrusted with passing on its faith. The court agreed, ruling that when an employee is “tasked with guiding students as they mature and grow into adulthood,” “[o]ne may reasonably presume that a religious school would expect faith to play a role in that work.”  

Every administrator, teacher, and guidance counselor at Roncalli High School signs an agreement to uphold the teachings of the Catholic Church in both their professional and private lives. In August of 2018, Lynn Starkey told Roncalli leadership that she was in a same-sex union in violation of her contract and centuries-old Catholic teaching. The school then explained that it could not renew her contract in light of her opposition to Catholic teaching. Ms. Starkey sued both Roncalli and the Archdiocese arguing that they had discriminated against her based on her sexual orientation. 

“Today’s ruling is common sense: religious groups have a constitutional right to hire people who agree with their religious beliefs and practices,” said Luke Goodrich, vice president and senior counsel at Becket. “At all levels of the judiciary, courts have made clear that the government has no place interfering with a religious organization’s decision about who can pass on the faith to the next generation.”  

The Supreme Court has long recognized that the Constitution forbids secular courts from interfering in important personnel decisions of churches and religious schools. The Court’s most recent decision came last year in Becket’s landmark case, Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru, in which it confirmed the principle of the “ministerial exception,” that religious schools should be free to choose their teachers without government interference. The full Seventh Circuit applied that ruling just last month in Becket’s win in Demkovich v. St. Andrew the Apostle Parish. And today, the federal court in Starkey upheld the principle of church autonomy by keeping secular courts out of questions of faith. 

“Many parents make sacrifices so their children can attend Catholic schools that uphold the dignity of every human person and teach the fullness of the Catholic faith,” said Goodrich. “Today’s decision ensures that religious schools can remain faithful to their religious mission.” 

For more information or to arrange an interview with a Becket attorney, contact Ryan Colby at media@becketlaw.org or 202-349-7219. Interviews can be arranged in English, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish. 

WASHINGTON – In Becket’s unanimous win today in InterVarsity v. University of Iowa, the federal court for the Eighth Circuit told University officials it was “hard-pressed to find a clearer example of viewpoint discrimination” than their discrimination against religious student groups, marking the third time religious groups successfully prevailed against discriminatory university administrators in recent months. The victory today and similar wins in InterVarsity v. Wayne State and BLinC v. University of Iowa make clear that universities must not discriminate against religious student clubs—and the Court warned that university officials who “make calculated choices about enacting or enforcing [such] unconstitutional policies” should be on notice that they are not entitled to qualified immunity but instead will be held personally accountable for their actions.  

“Schools are supposed to be a place of free inquiry and open thought, but the school officials here punished opinions they didn’t like and promoted ones they did—all while using taxpayer dollars to do it,” said Daniel Blomberg, senior counsel at Becket. “The good news is that they’ve been held accountable, and school officials nationwide are on notice. We are optimistic that in the future, colleges will pursue policies of accommodation, not discrimination, when it comes to religious exercise on campus.”

In 2018, the University of Iowa deregistered InterVarsity Graduate Christian Fellowship and numerous other religious groups—including Muslim and Sikh groups—because of their common-sense requirement that their leaders agree with their religious beliefs. As in the Wayne State and BLinC cases, the University justified its targeting of religious clubs by accusing the clubs of “discrimination” for wanting their leadership to share their values—even while the schools permitted other organizations (such as sororities, fraternities, and political or activist groups) to consider criteria such as a student’s sex, race, or ideology in the selection of club leadership and membership. Today’s victory will bring all campus religious student groups lasting protection from religious discrimination by officials at public universities. 

The Court encapsulated the situation—and the unconstitutionality—neatly: 

What the University did here was clearly unconstitutional. It targeted religious groups for differential treatment under the Human Rights Policy—while carving out exemptions and ignoring other violative groups with missions [the University] presumably supported. The University and individual defendants turned a blind eye to decades of First Amendment jurisprudence or they proceeded full speed ahead knowing they were violating the law. 

Religious student clubs like InterVarsity provide a valuable place for students to meet, pray, study, and worship. They also help students serve the community, mentoring at-risk youth, raising funds to combat global poverty and cleaning up local neighborhoods. Religious student groups provide a way for students to take time from their studies to focus on their faith and on helping others. And religious groups rely on their student leaders to keep that focus strong.  

“Religious groups should be able to have religious leaders. Government officials don’t get to tell Christians, Muslims, or Sikhs who will lead their prayers or their worship,” said Blomberg. “That’s not just bedrock constitutional law, it’s also common sense. And now the University of Iowa knows it.”  

For more information or to arrange an interview with a Becket attorney, contact Ryan Colby at media@becketlaw.org or 202-349-7219. Interviews can be arranged in English, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish. 

WASHINGTON – A federal appeals court ruled that religious organizations have the freedom to choose and supervise their religious leaders, free from government intrusion. In Demkovich v. St. Andrew the Apostle Parish, the former music director of St. Andrew parish sued the Archdiocese of Chicago for requiring its liturgical leaders to follow the Catholic faith. After a Seventh Circuit panel ruled against the Archdiocese, Becket joined the Archdiocese to ask the entire court to rehear the case. On Friday, the en banc Seventh Circuit reversed the panel’s previous ruling and declared that the “ministerial exception,” a doctrine that protects against government intrusion into the employment relationships between churches and their ministers, protects the entire ministerial relationship and not just the beginning or end.  

“Worship is sacred. That’s why worship leaders who select and perform elements of worship are ministers of the faith, conveying its teachings to the faithful,” said Daniel Blomberg, senior counsel at Becket. “That’s also why the church—not the state—gets to make sure that its music ministers are directing its congregation in a way that’s faithful to its beliefs.” 

The Seventh Circuit’s ruling upholds important First Amendment principles for the interaction of church and state, reminding lower courts that “we cannot lose sight of the harms—civil intrusion and excessive entanglement—that the ministerial exception prevents.” Thus, instead of merely safeguarding the beginning and end of a ministerial relationship, the First Amendment “covers the entire employment relationship, including hiring, firing, and supervising in between.”  

As a church music director and organist, Sandor Demkovich played a central role in planning and performing the liturgy and conveying the Catholic faith to St. Andrew’s congregation. When Mr. Demkovich entered into a same-sex marriage in violation of his employment agreement and 2,000-year-old Church teaching, the pastor had to terminate his employment. Mr. Demkovich then sued the Archdiocese.  

“The court ruled that the government can’t interfere in the ministerial relationship between a church and worship leaders,” said Blomberg. “It’s common sense that if the government can’t tell a church which ministers to hire or fire, it also can’t manage churches’ ministerial relationships in between.”  

The Archdiocese of Chicago is also represented by its General Counsel, James Geoly, who argued the case before the panel and the en banc court, and by Alex Marks at Burke, Warren, MacKay & Serritella, P.C. 

For more information or to arrange an interview, contact Ryan Colby at media@becketlaw.org or 202-349-7219. Interviews can be arranged in English, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish. 

WASHINGTON – An Indiana trial court today issued an important ruling in favor of the Archdiocese of Indianapolis, confirming its right to ensure students and families receive an authentic Catholic education. In Payne-Elliot v. Archdiocese of Indianapolis, a former Catholic high school teacher sued the Archdiocese after he was dismissed for entering a same-sex union in violation of his contract and millennia of Church teaching. The trial court initially ruled that the lawsuit could move forward, but the Indiana Supreme Court sent the case back down and authorized the trial court to reconsider. The court then threw out the entire case, vindicating the Archdiocese’s constitutional right to set religious standards for its schools.

Every Catholic school teacher in the Archdiocese of Indianapolis signs an agreement to uphold the teachings of the Catholic Church in word and deed. In 2017, Joshua Payne-Elliott, who taught at Cathedral Catholic High School in Indianapolis, entered a same-sex union in violation of both his employment agreement and centuries of Catholic teaching. After an extensive period of discernment and dialogue, the Archdiocese of Indianapolis informed Cathedral High School that if it wanted to remain affiliated with the Catholic Church, it needed to require its teachers to uphold Church teaching. After Cathedral separated from Mr. Payne-Elliott and provided him with a settlement, he sued the Archdiocese.

“If the First Amendment means anything, it means the government can’t punish the Catholic Church for asking Catholic educators to support Catholic teaching,” said Luke Goodrich, vice president and senior counsel at Becket, which is representing the Archdiocese. “This has always been a very simple case, because the Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed the freedom of religious schools to choose teachers who support their religious faith.”

The Supreme Court has long recognized that the Constitution protects the personnel decisions of churches and religious schools. The Court’s most recent decision came earlier this year in Becket’s landmark cases, Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru and St. James Catholic School v. Biel, in which the Supreme Court affirmed the right of religious organizations to “autonomy” in matters of faith, doctrine, and internal governance. Prior to that, the Supreme Court unanimously affirmed the same right in EEOC v. Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School, another Becket case. Today, the Indiana court applied that principle and affirmed that the government has no business interfering in religious standards at religious schools.

In September 2020, both the United States Department of Justice and the State of Indiana filed briefs in the case, arguing that “settled law on the church-autonomy doctrine makes clear that the First Amendment prohibits the [lawsuit].” It is not yet clear if the plaintiff intends to appeal.

For more information or to arrange an interview with a Becket attorney, contact Ryan Colby at media@becketlaw.org or 202-349-7219. Interviews can be arranged in English, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish.

Leer En Español

WASHINGTON – The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty filed a friend-of-the-court brief late yesterday at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, arguing that churches, synagogues, and mosques throughout the Western Hemisphere—not state officials—should choose who teaches religion in schools. The case, Pavez v. Chile, concerns a lawsuit brought against the Diocese of San Bernardo, Chile, by a schoolteacher whose certification to teach the Catholic faith was revoked by the diocese over a violation of Catholic canon law.

Becket’s brief explains that international and national courts around the world have recognized the fundamental principle of church autonomy: religious control over religious questions like who teaches the faith to the next generation. Becket’s brief urges the Inter-American Court—an international tribunal with jurisdiction over 35 nations in the Western Hemisphere, including the United States, Canada, Mexico, and Argentina, among others—to recognize the same principle that other international tribunals have.

“The autonomy of religious groups is fundamental to any democratic society,” said Diana Verm, senior counsel at Becket. “State officials simply should not be in the business of picking bishops, rabbis, imams, or teachers of religion.”

In Chile, a predominantly Catholic nation, religion classes are taught in government schools, but as a matter of religious autonomy, the teachers of these classes must be certified by the local Catholic bishop as qualified to teach the Catholic religion. When Sandra Pavez, a religion teacher in a government school in San Bernardo, entered a same-sex marriage in violation of Church teaching, the Diocese of San Bernardo revoked her certification.

Although Ms. Pavez was retained and even promoted by the school, she sued the diocese—which was not her employer—for employment discrimination. When Chilean courts ruled against her, she brought a case against the nation of Chile in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, alleging that Chile had allowed “arbitrary interference in private life” in violation of the American Convention on Human Rights.

Becket’s brief explains that a broad array of legal precedents—from international human rights law, from the constitutions and laws of American nations, and from the European Court of Human Rights—consistently support the principle of religious autonomy as fundamental to all democratic states. Indeed, religious autonomy provides special protection for minority and unpopular groups. By contrast, authoritarian states like Iran and Russia fail to respect both religious autonomy and LGBTQ persons.

“It is better for both church and state if the state does not decide religious questions,” said Verm. “All democratic societies recognize that fundamental fact. The Inter-American Court should side with those countries, not serial human rights violators like Saudi Arabia or North Korea.”

For more information or to arrange an interview with a Becket attorney, contact Ryan Colby at media@becketlaw.org or 202-349-7219. Interviews can be arranged in English, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish.

WASHINGTON – In a landmark decision with nationwide impact, a federal judge ruled that a seminary has the right to train students for ministry according to its sincere religious beliefs, free from government entanglement. Yesterday, in Maxon v. Fuller Theological Seminary, the Central District of California blocked claims by two individuals who sued Fuller Theological Seminary, arguing that federal law made it illegal for the seminary to dismiss them from its School of Theology for violating its religious standards. Becket is defending the seminary, arguing that the government cannot control how religious schools train future ministers and other religious leaders.

When students apply to Fuller Theological Seminary, they agree to faithfully follow the seminary’s religious standards throughout their training for ministry and other religious service. Like all their peers, the plaintiffs made that agreement. But after the seminary learned that the plaintiffs had violated the standards, the seminary regretfully dismissed them and refunded their costs for the classes they were unable to complete. The plaintiffs then sued.

The judge dismissed the plaintiffs’ lawsuit, explaining: “It is well established . . . that courts should refrain from trolling through a person’s or institutions religious beliefs.”

“This is a huge win for seminaries, yeshivas, madrasas, and every other religious institution of higher education,” said Daniel Blomberg, senior attorney at Becket. “That’s because houses of worship, and not government officials, should be deciding how to teach the next generation of religious leaders.”

Fuller Theological Seminary is one of the world’s leading Christian educational institutions. It is a multidenominational, international, and multiethnic seminary committed to training global Christian leaders for the fulfillment of their religious callings. Each student who graduates from the seminary is prepared to be a leader in the faith and to practice and teach the gospel to their diverse communities.

As a religious educational institution, the seminary has the First Amendment right to uphold specific standards of faith and morality for the members of its Christian community. Federal civil rights law has affirmatively protected this fundamental constitutional right for decades. Until now, no court had ever been required to apply those laws to protect a seminary. Fuller’s win helps protect religious schools nationwide.

“Personal persuasion, not government coercion, is how the First Amendment allows citizens to engage with religious beliefs they don’t like,” said Blomberg. “This lawsuit threatened to impose a government straitjacket on all Americans, and it’s good for everyone that the court said no.”

For more information or to arrange an interview with a Becket attorney, contact Ryan Colby at media@becketlaw.org or 202-349-7219. Interviews can be arranged in English, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish.

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 in favor of two California Catholic schools today, finding that the government cannot control a church school’s decision about who teaches its religion classes. In Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru and St. James Catholic School v. Biel, the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty defended two Catholic elementary schools that chose not to renew the contracts of two fifth-grade teachers who were not effectively carrying out the schools’ missions. Becket argued that both Church and State are better off when the government doesn’t entangle itself in the internal religious decisions of religious groups about who best teaches the faith to the next generation.

Justice Alito wrote for the Court that for religious schools, “educating young people in their faith, inculcating its teachings, and training them to live their faith are responsibilities that lie at the very core of the mission.” He also wrote about the “the rich diversity of religious education in this country,” citing examples of schools from many different religious traditions. The Court also cited “the close connection that religious institutions draw between their central purpose and educating the young in the faith.”

“Religious schools play an integral role in passing the faith to the next generation of believers,” said Adrian Alarcon, spokesperson for the Archdiocese of Los Angeles Catholic Schools. “We are grateful that the Supreme Court recognized faith groups must be free to make their own decisions about who should be entrusted with these essential duties.”

Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru and St. James Catholic School v. Biel involve two fifth-grade teachers who taught in-depth classes on the Catholic faith to their students for several hours each week, integrated Catholic values into every other subject, prayed with their students daily, and accompanied them to Mass and other religious services. The schools chose not to renew the teachers’ contracts due to poor performance, which ranged from failure to follow basic educational expectations to chaotic classrooms with children crawling on the floor. But the teachers sued, and lower courts ruled that government officials could be permitted to second-guess the schools’ decision about whether these teachers could effectively teach the Catholic faith to their students. Numerous judges, scholars, and faith groups warned these rulings violated fundamental civil rights for religious communities, especially minority groups.

The Supreme Court’s decision built on its previous unanimous decision in Becket’s 2012 case, Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC, confirming that the First Amendment protects all teachers who teach religion devotionally to their students. The decision recognizes that many denominations rely on non-ordained employees to pass the faith to the next generation and rejects formalistic requirements—like having a religious-sounding title—which create obstacles to the vital protections afforded by the First Amendment. A broad and flexible approach is especially important to minority religious groups, who often must partner with people from other faith backgrounds to operate their religious schools. A recent survey confirmed that Americans overwhelmingly support letting religious groups select their own religion teachers and reject government entanglement in such important decisions.

“Today is a huge win for religious schools of all faith traditions,” said Eric Rassbach, vice president and senior counsel at Becket, who argued the case to the Court. “The last thing government officials should do is decide who is authorized to teach Catholicism to Catholics or Judaism to Jews. We are glad the Court has resoundingly reaffirmed that churches and synagogues, not government, control who teaches kids about God.”

What:
Press Call to discuss Supreme Court’s opinions in Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru and St. James Catholic School v. Biel, and Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania

Who:
Mark Rienzi, president at Becket (Available for interviews)
Eric Rassbach, vice president and senior counsel at Becket (Available for interviews)

When:
Today at 11:30 a.m. EDT/8:30 a.m. PDT

Press Call Information:
301-715-8592  | Pin #: 914-118-5568 | or join http://zoom.us/my/comms.line.external

 Email questions in advance to media@becketlaw.org

For more information or to arrange an interview with a Becket attorney, contact Ryan Colby at media@becketlaw.org or 202-349-7219. Interviews can be arranged in English, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Russian, or Spanish.

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court heard oral argument today in a case that will determine if the government can control who a church school chooses to teach its religion classes. In Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru and in St. James Catholic School v. Biel, the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty is defending two California Catholic elementary schools that chose not to renew the contracts of two fifth-grade teachers who were not effectively carrying out the schools’ missions. Becket argued that the government has no place entangling itself in the internal religious decisions of religious groups about who best teaches the faith to the next generation.

A number of the Justices’ questions focused on the Court’s landmark 2012 ruling in Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC, in which the Court ruled unanimously in favor of a Lutheran school defended by Becket. A majority of the Justices expressed broad support for Becket’s argument that religious schools must be free to choose who teaches the faith to the next generation. By contrast, Justice Kagan expressed “surprise” that the plaintiffs’ lawyer thought the government could interfere even with the selection of full-time religion teachers.

“This is an important moment for our community of faith, especially our schools,” said Adrian Alarcon, spokesperson for the Archdiocese of Los Angeles Catholic Schools. “We are defending our freedom to choose who may teach, inspire, and advance the faith at our Catholic schools, free from government interference.”

The case concerns fifth-grade teachers who taught an in-depth class on the Catholic faith to their students for several hours each week, integrated Catholic values into every other subject, prayed with their students daily, and accompanied them to Mass and other religious services. Nevertheless, when the schools chose not to renew the teachers’ contracts because of classroom performance, the lower courts said that governments should be permitted to second-guess the decision.

At the Supreme Court, a broad coalition of minority-faith groups, leading law professors, members of Congress and state governments sided with the schools, advising the Court about the dangerous consequences of allowing the government to control who religious groups choose to teach the faith, and asking the Justices to uphold a common sense rule the Court protected unanimously in 2012.

“For any faith to continue, someone has to teach the faith to the next generation,” said Eric Rassbach, vice president and senior counsel at Becket. “And under our system of separation of church and state, the government cannot decide who carries out that crucial task. We are confident that the Court recognizes how important a role teachers play in the lives of their students, and will reaffirm its precedent that the government can’t control who teaches kids about God.”

Becket will host a press call at 1:45 p.m. ET. Audio from the press call can be found here.

Press call information:
646-876-9923 | Pin #: 930-944-5568 | or join http://zoom.us/my/comms.line.external 

Email questions in advance to media@becketlaw.org

For more information or to arrange an interview with a Becket attorney, contact Ryan Colby at media@becketlaw.org or 202-349-7219. Interviews can be arranged in English, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Russian, or Spanish.

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court agreed today to weigh in on whether the government can control who a church school chooses to teach its religion classes. In Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru and in St. James Catholic School v. Biel, the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty is defending two California Catholic elementary schools’ right to choose ministers that embody their faith without government interference. After the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled against both schools and rejected the prevailing common-sense standard for allowing religious schools to choose their teachers, Becket appealed to the Supreme Court, which has now agreed to hear both cases.

In Hosanna-Tabor, a similar Becket case in 2012, the Supreme Court unanimously upheld the “ministerial exception” for a church school, a First Amendment right that allows religious schools to choose their own religion teachers. The ministerial exception protects all religious groups’ freedom to choose “ministerial” employees without interference from bureaucrats or courts. Most courts have ruled that ministerial employees are those employees who perform important religious functions, like instructing young children in the precepts of the Catholic faith. But in both Our Lady of Guadalupe School and St. James School, the Ninth Circuit rejected this widely accepted rule.

“Parents trust Catholic schools to assist them in one of their most important duties: forming the faith of their children,” said Montserrat Alvarado, vice president and executive director at Becket. “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.”

Agnes Morrissey-Berru and Kristen Biel played crucial roles in teaching the Catholic faith to their fifth-grade students. Both taught a religion class, integrated Catholic values into every subject they taught, joined their students in daily prayer, and accompanied students to Mass and other religious services. However, when each school decided not to renew the teachers’ contracts based on a history of poor performance, both teachers sued.

In December 2018, the Ninth Circuit ruled against St. James Catholic School. In April 2019, the court also ruled against Our Lady of Guadalupe School. Even though both teachers had significant religious responsibilities, the Ninth Circuit still decided that their work was not religious enough. Nine Ninth Circuit judges wrote a scathing dissent criticizing the rulings, and leading legal scholars and diverse religious groups condemned the rulings as dangerously wrong.

“Do we really want judges, juries, or bureaucrats deciding who ought to teach Catholicism at a parish school, or Judaism at a Jewish day school? Of course not,” said Eric Rassbach, vice president and senior counsel at Becket. “Religion teachers play a vital role in the ecosystem of faith. We are confident that the Supreme Court will recognize that under our Constitution government officials cannot control who teaches kids what to believe.”

For more information or to arrange an interview with a Becket attorney, contact Ryan Colby at media@becketlaw.org or 202-349-7219. Interviews can be arranged in English, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Russian, or Spanish.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – A small African-American Baptist church founded over a century ago in Pittsburgh is standing up in court against a lawsuit threatening to close its doors and deny its right to hold its religious leaders accountable. In Lee v. Sixth Mount Zion Baptist Church, the church is being sued by a former pastor after firing him because he failed to lead the church well. Late yesterday, Sixth Mount Zion, represented by Becket, urged a federal appellate court in Philadelphia to reject the pastor’s attempt to undermine churches’ ability to ensure their religious leaders don’t harm their ministry. 

In 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Hosanna-Tabor v. EEOC unanimously protected a house of worship’s First Amendment right— known as the ministerial exception–to  hire or fire its ministers, free from government interference. Becket argues that Hosanna-Tabor’s ruling also protects Sixth Mount Zion from its former pastor’s attempt to use the courts to complain that the church was wrong to dismiss him for failed religious leadership.   

“Courts can’t second-guess a church’s conclusion that a minister is doing a bad job ministering,” said Daniel Blomberg, senior counsel at Becket. “How would a federal judge evaluate the orthodoxy of a priest’s sermons or the fervor of a rabbi’s prayers? Judges shouldn’t be put in that impossible position, and the First Amendment says that they can’t be.”  

Founded in 1899, Sixth Mount Zion Baptist Church hosts about 100 people at its Sunday worship services and is located in one of the poorest parts of Pittsburgh, where 25 percent of houses in the area sit vacant, unemployment is at 25 percent and over 30 percent of the households are led by single moms. In an attempt to help serve its community, the church selected Rev. David Lee as its pastor in 2012. But three months after becoming pastor, Rev. Lee insisted that the church sign a contract giving him a 20-year term in office while promising that they could still fire him if they believed he wasn’t leading well. The next two years under his leadership saw the church’s registered membership plummet 61 percent, Sunday morning worship attendance drop 32 percent, and tithes and offerings decrease 39 percent—all while church expenditures rose nearly 200 percent.   

When the church asked Rev. Lee to step down in 2015, he sued Sixth Mount Zion and eleven of its lay leaders for $2.6 million. A federal trial court rejected his lawsuit under the ministerial exception. Rev. Lee appealed that decision to U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit based in Philadelphia. He argues that the First Amendment shouldn’t apply because his failure to “attract new souls to Christ” was really just a “secular” failure, equivalent to a sports manager failing to “attract new fans to the game.” 

“To hear Rev. Lee tell it, Jesus Christ was a glorified sales manager, the Pope is a mere administrator, and the Dalai Lama is only a motivational speaker,” said Blomberg. “If the separation of church and state means anything, it means that courts can’t reduce houses of worship to religion-flavored social clubs, or tell them who should preach to them.”  

Oral argument in the case is expected later this year. The church is also represented by Alan Cech of Murtagh, Hobaugh & Cech, LLC. 

For more information or to arrange an interview with a Becket attorney, please contact Melinda Skea at media@becketlaw.org or 202-349-7224. Interviews can be arranged in English, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Russian and Spanish.   

### 

Becket is a non-profit, public-interest law firm dedicated to protecting the free expression of all religious traditions. For over 20 years, it has defended clients of all faiths, including Buddhists, Christians, Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Native Americans, Sikhs, and Zoroastrians (read more).