This church victory is a win for everyone.

• Author: Emord, Jonathan W.
• Position: National Affairs - Column

IN JAN. 11, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the government may not second guess the decision of a church to hire and fire ministers, even if the church's decision otherwise would be actionable under Federal law (including under the Americans with Disabilities Act). Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church v. EEOC is a magnificent (and essential) victory for the First Amendment religion clauses. The establishment and free exercise clauses of the First Amendment were intended to prevent the state from supplanting religious decisionmaking with state orthodoxies.

In Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church, the church called Cheryl Perich to the position of commissioned minister. After serving in a teaching capacity that involved secular and religious instruction, Perich developed narcolepsy and went on disability leave. Following that leave, she contacted the church and requested to return to her teaching duties. She was informed that the Lutheran school already contracted with a lay teacher to fill her position for the remainder of the school year. The congregation offered to pay a portion of Perich's health insurance premiums on the condition that she resign as a called teacher. Perich refused to resign, arrived at the school to occupy her teaching post but was rebuffed in that attempt, and received word from the school that she likely would be fired. The congregation then voted to rescind Perich's call and sent her a letter of termination. Perich filed suit with the EEOC under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Obama Administration's Equal Employment Opportunity Commission decided to break new ground and second guess the judgment of the Lutheran Church, hoping to force the church to abide by discrimination laws.

In district court, the EEOC case was dismissed. The court barred the suit on First Amendment grounds, reciting the "ministerial exception" to the discrimination laws, including the Americans with Disabilities Act. She appealed, and the Sixth Circuit reversed, holding the "ministerial exception" inapplicable. The Sixth Circuit variously ruled that there was no relevance to the fact that Perich was a commissioned minister. The Court found her religious duties to be the same as lay ministers hired by the church and found much of her work to be secular in nature.

If the Supreme Court had upheld the Sixth Circuit decision, all manner of Federal intrusion into the affairs of churches would follow, as the Obama Administration would have exploited new authority to undermine practices by churches to which it harbored objections. The Federal government then could parse the duties performed by a church, segregating those deemed wholly religious from those deemed largely secular, permitting regulation of the latter. The discrimination laws could be enforced against churches, forcing the priesthood to be open to women; classes separated by gender, age, and marital status to be integrated; and marriage ceremonies to be open to all regardless of their sexual orientation.

The decision of whom to hire or fire in a religious group and the reasons for selection of those who hold offices and positions within a church or on behalf of a church are ones inextricably intertwined with the free exercise of religion. Whatever theological or other justification may exist for choosing a minister, that justification is beyond the reach of the state if the American people are to retain freedom of choice in religious matters. As soon as Federal officials may apply secular criteria to matters of decision within a church, then the freedom of religion is replaced with state orthodoxies and those oleodoxies in tact establish a state religion.

In a 9-0 decision, the Supreme Court reversed the Sixth Circuit and championed the original...