Law professors Eugene Volokh and Richard Re discuss Kennedy's retirement and its impact on the court, the relevance of the 11th Amendment and sovereign immunity in a lawsuit against a university, the collection of funds from students and potential discrimination lawsuits, a hypothetical scenario about the enforcement of federal gun laws, a case touching on immigration and administrative agency interpretation, applying the ministerial exception in religious liberty cases, and the requirements for participation in marriage ceremonies and judges' decision making.
The court struggles to define the scope of the ministerial exception, balancing religious freedom and avoiding preferential treatment for different religious practices.
The court's decision on the interaction between generally applicable laws and religious liberty could have significant implications for religious institutions in employment matters.
The case of Los Angeles v. Barr highlights the court's rejection of a Spending Clause challenge and reliance on Chevron deference, setting a precedent for federal grants based on immigration compliance.
Deep dives
The ministerial exception and its application to a Catholic school teacher
This case explores the interaction between federal anti-discrimination law and the religion clauses of the First Amendment. The plaintiff, a fifth-grade teacher at a Catholic school, was fired after being diagnosed with breast cancer. She argues that this violated the Americans with Disabilities Act. However, the school claims protection under the ministerial exception, which exempts certain religious institutions from federal anti-discrimination law. The court wrestles with defining the scope of the exception and whether the plaintiff qualifies as a ministerial employee. The majority determines that she does not qualify as a minister and allows her ADA claim to proceed.
The challenges of defining the ministerial exception
In examining the ministerial exception, the court struggles to establish clear boundaries that accommodate various religious practices. The exception was originally created to protect religious institutions from interference in hiring and retaining religious leaders. However, the challenge arises when different religious denominations have different structures and roles for such leaders. The court attempts to strike a balance between respecting religious freedom and avoiding preferential treatment for certain religious practices. The dissent argues for a more flexible and adaptable approach to the exception, considering the unique circumstances of each case.
Potential implications and circuit split
This case highlights the need to navigate the tension between generally applicable laws and religious liberty. The court's decision could have wide-ranging implications for determining how religious institutions can exercise their beliefs in employment matters. With a circuit split and a petition for rehearing on bonk, this case may present an opportunity for the Supreme Court to clarify and establish a more consistent approach to the ministerial exception across different religious traditions.
Los Angeles versus Barr
In the case of Los Angeles versus Barr, a two-to-one decision authored by Judge Acuda ruled against a suit by Los Angeles, which challenged the DOJ's allocation of federal grants based on compliance with federal immigration priorities. This decision contrasts with other cases involving sanctuary cities, where the Trump administration has faced losses. The court found that the grant application process was not moot, allowing for further review, and determined that Los Angeles had standing to bring the case. The court rejected a Spending Clause challenge, as it determined that the federal government's request to align community policing with federal immigration priorities was not objectionable. Additionally, the court found that the DOJ's policy did not violate the governing statute, relying on Chevron deference. Finally, the court found that the government's decision-making process for implementing the program was sufficiently reasoned, despite concerns about potential negative effects on community policing.
Ministerial Exception and Implications
Further discussion during the podcast revolved around the broader implications of the ministerial exception, which exempts religious institutions from certain employment discrimination laws. The panel explored differing views on the scope and application of the exception. One perspective emphasized the importance of the role in transmitting religious teachings, while others favored a more open interpretation of the exception, considering credible religious reasoning. The conversation connected the decision in this case to ongoing discussions about religious exemptions in cases of discrimination based on sexual orientation or transgender identity. The panelists contemplated the need for a careful balance between religious freedom and non-discrimination.
A Ninth Circuit episode featuring Eugene Volokh, Richard Re, and Robert Everett Johnson. Recorded live before a student audience at the invitation of the UCLA chapter of the Federalist Society.
Eugene Volokh and Richard Re are professors at UCLA Law. Robert Everett Johnson is an associate at Jones Day.
Use iTunes? itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/short…cuit/id309062019
Use Android (RSS)? feeds.soundcloud.com/users/soundclo…247/sounds.rss
Newsletter: ij.org/about-us/shortcircuit/
Want to email us? shortcircuit@ij.org
The Koala v. Khosla: http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2019/07/24/17-55380.pdf
City of Los Angeles v. Barr: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2019/07/12/18-55599.pdf
Biel v. St. James School panel decision: http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/12/17/17-55180.pdf
Biel v. St. James School dissent from denial of en banc review: http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2019/06/25/17-55180.pdf
Get the Snipd podcast app
Unlock the knowledge in podcasts with the podcast player of the future.
AI-powered podcast player
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
Discover highlights
Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode
Save any moment
Hear something you like? Tap your headphones to save it with AI-generated key takeaways
Share & Export
Send highlights to Twitter, WhatsApp or export them to Notion, Readwise & more
AI-powered podcast player
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
Discover highlights
Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode