Religious-Liberty-Annual-Report

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

viduals employed as ministers. Since the Supreme Court first recognized the ministerial exception in the landmark Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Luther an Church and School v. EEOC case in 2012, legal battles large and small have been fought over the scope of the doctrine — who counts as a “minister,” and how broad are the protections afforded by the doctrine. 59 The year 2023 was no different in this regard, as substantial disagreement remains over various applications of the doctrine. For instance, one Connecticut state court held in Sklar v. Temple Israel, Westport Incorporated that the ministerial exception barred the plaintiff’s breach of contract claim, while another Connecticut court, in Gack enheimer v. Southern New England Conference of the United Church of Christ, Inc. , ruled that the doctrine barred the plaintiff’s claim of slander but not his breach of contract claim. 60 Governments award grants or enter contracts with private charities to perform social services and of fer aid to private schools for the safety and edu cation of their students, and it is not uncommon for religious schools and charities to participate in these public benefit programs. The Federal Emer gency Management Agency, for instance, provides disaster relief funding for rebuilding religious schools destroyed by natural disasters, and grants to houses of worship to better secure their facilities from a mass shooting. Often among the numerous strings attached to government aid are exclusionary conditions that make it hard if not impossible for some religious organizations to participate in government pro grams. This past year saw several lawsuits filed to 4. Exclusionary Conditions Attached to Gov ernment Assistance

OSV News photo/CNS file, Bob Roller

challenge such conditions. Two lawsuits were filed in Colorado over con ditions in funding for the state’s new universal pre-K program that would require all participat ing schools to affirm tenets of gender ideology. In October, a court ruled that Colorado’s conditions violate the schools’ right to expressive association and their protections under the ministerial excep tion doctrine. 61 In Maine, two religious schools filed lawsuits challenging state criteria that exclude them from participating in the state’s school voucher program — a requirement that participating schools treat all religious expression the same, and again a require ment to affirm tenets of gender ideology. 62 Maine instituted those requirements after the Supreme Court, in Carson v. Makin , struck down the state’s exclusion of any school that would use the tuition assistance funds for religious instruction. 63 Further, nearly all of the regulations discussed above in Section IV operate as conditions attached to funds from the federal government — only the HHS contraceptive mandate and the EEOC’s Preg nant Workers Fairness Act regulations do not.