Religious-Liberty-Annual-Report

VI – National Trends in Politics, Culture, and Law 33

B. Litigation

among courts on the question of what the Title VII religious exemption means, potentially increasing the likelihood of an eventual Supreme Court re view. freedom debates, in this case by creating a Satanic abortion ritual for which it claimed religious freedom protections — saw its lawsuit in Indiana dismissed in October 2023. 2. Litigation Seeking Religious Exemptions to Abortion Restrictions After Dobbs , many states passed laws to protect children in the womb, and supporters of abortion fought those laws through a variety of tactics. One was for plaintiffs to file lawsuits claiming that ob taining an abortion was an exercise of their reli gious beliefs, and therefore state religious freedom laws require they be granted an exemption from state abortion restrictions. In 2022 and 2023, lawsuits of this nature have been brought in at least eight states. The Satanic Temple — which has frequently sought to be a poi son pill in religious freedom debates, in this case by creating a Satanic abortion ritual for which it claimed religious freedom protections — saw its lawsuit in Indiana dismissed in October 2023. 56 Other claims were brought, in Florida for instance, asserting that Jewish teaching not only permits but requires abortion in some circumstances. 57 (Many within the Jewish community have strongly dis puted this interpretation of Jewish teaching.) 58 The ministerial exception doctrine is a constitu tional principle that the government cannot inter fere with a religious organization’s choice of who will be ministers of its faith. Under the doctrine, religious organizations are generally immune from claims of employment discrimination from indi 3. Litigation Over the Scope of the Ministerial Exception The Satanic Temple — which has frequently sought to be a poison pill in religious

1. The Meaning of the Title VII Exemption for Religious Employers Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is one of the nation’s most significant civil rights protections. It prohibits employment discrimination on the ba sis of race, color, national origin, religion, and sex. Recognizing that religious employers often need to make employment decisions motivated by their religious beliefs in order to maintain the religious identity and integrity of the organization, Congress had the good sense to include an exemption in Title VII for religious employers. Because Title VII is so central to the national legal framework of anti-discrimination laws, inter pretations of its meaning have broad effects. Nu merous federal rulemakings in 2023 involved the scope of the Title VII exemption — the EEOC’s Pregnant Workers Fairness Act regulations, the Department of Labor rule on religious exemptions for federal contractors, and the multiagency rule on partnerships with faith-based organizations, for example. While federal agencies were taking a narrow view of the exemption, courts reached their own conclusions. At the Seventh Circuit Court of Ap peals in Fitzgerald v. Roncalli High School , Judge Michael Brennan’s concurrence concluded that Ti tle VII’s religious exemption provides a defense not just to religious discrimination claims under Title VII, but to all Title VII claims when the religious employer has acted on the basis of its religious be liefs. 53 This result, Judge Brennan explained, is re quired by the text of the Title VII religious exemp tion. In a similar case before the Seventh Circuit Court just a year earlier, Judge Frank Easterbrook concurred to say the same. 54 The federal district court for the Northern Dis trict of Texas reached the same conclusion in Bear Creek Bible Church v. EEOC : “The plain text of this exemption … exempts religious employers from other forms of discrimination under Title VII, so long as the employment decision was rooted in re ligious belief.” 55 These decisions deepen an existing divide