by Jorge Gomez • 5 minutes
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently issued a major ruling affirming that a Washington ministry has the right to hire employees who are aligned with and live out its religious beliefs.
In a unanimous decision, the Court ruled in favor of Yakima Union Gospel Mission, whose purpose is to share its Christian through its homeless shelter and other community service programs, including addiction recovery, food distribution and health clinics. With the help of our friends at Alliance Defending Freedom, the charity challenged a state law that limited its ability to hire individuals who shared its beliefs.
The U.S. Supreme Court and appellate courts have long recognized the “ministerial exception,” a legal doctrine that protects religious organizations’ right to make employment decisions for their ministers. This ensures that government doesn’t meddle in the internal affairs of who or how a religious organization selects to teach its faith or fulfill its mission.
So, why is this recent ruling different or significant? Because the 9th Circuit ruled that faith-based groups have a constitutional right to hire according to their beliefs for non-minister positions, which gives religious organizations an added level of protection in their hiring practices.
The 9th Circuit based its ruling on the church autonomy doctrine, which offers a broad shield of protection for churches and religious nonprofits.
“Because who a religious organization hires may go to the very character of its religious mission, the church autonomy doctrine protects the decision to hire co-religionists for non-ministerial roles if that decision is based on the organization’s sincerely held religious beliefs,” wrote Judge Patrick Bumatay, who authored the Court’s opinion.
“If state law were to prevent religious institutions from employing only co-religionists, those institutions could be forced to hire employees who openly flout and disagree with their religious principles,” Bumatay continued. “This, the First Amendment doesn’t tolerate.”
“The decision is all the more significant because of the court that handed it down,” explain John Stonestreet and Ian Speir at the Colson Center.
“The 9th Circuit covers states like Washington, Oregon, and California, progressive states that have, in recent years, become increasingly hostile to people and institutions of faith,” Stonestreet and Spier added.
The 9th is often considered one of the toughest courts to litigate—and let alone win—religious freedom cases. For many years, it’s been a stronghold of judges who use their authority to legislate from the bench, as opposed to adhering to their constitutional role of interpreting the law. That’s a big reason why many decisions made by the 9th Circuit were often against religious freedom.
There’s another point worth noting. This is the second time in less than a year that the 9th Circuit has sided with religious organizations regarding hiring practices.
Last fall, the Court ruled in favor of World Vision, a global Christian ministry that focuses on relief and development, recognizing that it had the right to make hiring and firing decisions based on religion when an employee performed tasks vital to World Vision’s religious mission.
First Liberty filed a friend-of-the-court brief in support of World Vision on behalf of The Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and Samaritan’s Purse.
In that brief, our attorneys argued that religious organizations should be able to hire for all positions—not just ministers—based on religion because all employees are “de facto spokesperson(s) of that organization.”
McMahon v World Vision was a positive, yet narrow ruling. The 9th Circuit decision focused only on the rights of religious organizations with respect to their ministers, rather than the rights of religious organizations regarding all of their employees.
In Union Gospel Mission of Yakima v. Brown, the appeals court addressed the question that it previously punted. It made clear that the Constitution protects the right of religious organizations to hire only those who align with its beliefs—regardless if that employee wears a clerical collar or not.
While there is still work to be done, the 9th Circuit’s decision is an important step in the right direction. And there’s tremendous hope as First Liberty continues to litigate cases across the country, especially in light of how federal appeals courts are ruling in these types of cases.
In September, First Liberty secured a huge victory for the North American Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that courts cannot “interfere with matters of church government, matters of faith, (and) matters of doctrine.” The 5th Circuit made clear that religious organizations and associations—not judges—have the freedom to choose how to fulfill their religious missions and with whom.
“The First Amendment prohibits the government from interfering with the autonomy of religious organizations and the church,” said Hiram Sasser, Executive General Counsel for First Liberty. “No court should be able to tell a church who it must hire to preach their beliefs, teach their faith, or carry out their mission.”
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals also upheld the right of New York pregnancy centers to hire only those who share their pro-life, religious values.
We are encouraged that the 9th Circuit and appellate courts are affirming that the constitutional protections of religious groups’ hiring rights are key to ensuring their religious integrity and autonomy.
Challenges to Religious Freedom Remain, With Opportunities to Impact the Future
Despite recent momentum, we have many more legal battles ahead to ensure that religious organizations and people of faith are protected in the workplace and beyond.
We’re still in the midst of two major legal battles at the 9th Circuit. We’re waiting for the court to issue a ruling in our Alaska Airlines case involving two flight attendants who were fired because of their religious beliefs.
We’re also waiting on a response to our petition in our California Charter Schools case. We’re challenging a lower court decision that allows California to discriminate against families who choose faith-based curricula in homeschool aid programs. We’ve asked the appeals court to review the case en banc, before a full panel of judges.
Make no mistake. While there are plenty of reasons for hope, the battle for our First Freedom is far from over.
Winning these cases won’t just impact our clients. These are opportunities to potentially set precedents that protect religious liberty for millions of Americans—and we need your support as we litigate at the highest level.
Can we count on you? Please give to First Liberty today.
 |
|
|
