The Saint Dominic Academy (SDA) is an all-girls Catholic school in Jersey City, New Jersey. The school is run and sponsored by the Dominican Sisters of Caldwell. In September 2018, one of the teachers at this school, Joan Simon, dispersed a letter in her classroom that depicted homosexual priests as the root of corruption in Catholicism. The letter was written by Catholic leader Ralph Martin. The Dean of the Saint Dominic Academy felt that this letter did not align with the goals of the school and their church-based teachings. Soon after handing out the letters, Simon had to take a leave of absence as a result of a motor vehicle accident. On October 9th, Joan Simon returned to work but was promptly fired from her position as Chairperson of the Religious Department and Campus Minister.
In response to these allegations, the SDA is basing its argument off of the recent decision in Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru. This case deals with the idea of the ministerial exception under the First Amendment. The Court ruled that the government should remove itself from situations regarding arguments over the employment of individuals in religious institutions. This decision grants autonomy to religious institutions and allows them to manage their organization in order to promote their religious mission. Properly managing internally means that the religious organization needs to be able to control who holds what position. A point further emphasized by the Court, in this case, is that ministerial exception is not limited to “ministers”. It can be applied to any individual who plays a vital role in the education and promotion of religion. Based off of the conclusions reached in this case, the SDA feels that the court should dismiss the SAC completely.
Another case that would help the SDA’s case would be Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church v. EEOC. In this case, Cheryl Perich was fired from her job after returning from her leave of absence. Prior to termination, Perich had gone through immense amounts of training and worked hard in order to take on more important roles in the school. It was because of this training, as well as her title, that clearly placed Perich under the ministerial exception. Another conclusion reached in this case is that the term “minister” should not be the only factor in determining whether or not the exception should be applied. Justice Alito felt that the duties and responsibilities of the individual should also be examined.
In the case of Joan Simon, she went through schooling in order to obtain her master’s degree in theology. Furthermore, she is referred to as a Campus Minister at the Saint Dominic Academy and is the Chairperson of the Religious Department. Due to her role in the school, it is clear that along with her ministerial title, her duties were rooted in the promotion of the religious mission of the SDA. The school was opposed to the letter that Simon distributed because they felt that it went against their religious mission. The Dean, as well as some parents, did not feel that it was appropriate or in the best interest of the students. Due to this, I think that a ministerial exception should be applied to this case. If the school felt that Simon was no longer the best fit for Campus Minister and Chairperson of the Religious Department, they have the autonomy to do what they feel is best for their institution. In terms of past cases, the decisions reached in Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru and Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church v. EEOC will take precedence. In both of these cases, the Court ruled in favor of religious institutions and their right to regulate their own employment decisions. In order for a court to take Simon’s side, they would have to simultaneously undermine the decisions of the SDA. This would go against everything that the ministerial exception set out to prevent. Due to the previous Court cases mentioned, I agree with the District Court of New Jersey’s decision to dismiss all of Simon’s claims against the Saint Dominic Academy
I agree with Olivia's analysis of the case, and believe that the school's decision to terminate the employment of the Campus Minister should be protected by ministerial exception. For one, it is clear that this teacher assumes the role of "minister", no matter how the term is interpreted. She both received theological training and education, has the literal title of "minister" and seems to be tasked with setting a religious example for the organization she works for. I do believe that religious organizations should have a say over who they deem fit to be the figures advancing their religion and setting forth a model for it, particularly to school children. If the state were able to interfere in this right, the leaders of all religions would have to adhere to what is societally accepted by the state, which would harm diversity of thought and freedom of diverse religions to exercise. Therefore, though it must be decided on a case-by-case basis, I do believe ministerial exception should be upheld, and I do think it has been appropriately applied to this case by the author.
ReplyDeleteI resonate with Olivia's analysis of the case because the school's decision to terminate the employment of the Campus Minister should be protected by ministerial exception.I believe that Simon is unfit from the position, and religious organizations should be able to select who is fit for positions that intersect with children. It is imperative that when there is any case that involves children that the children are protected. The use of ministerial exception is going to be different for a wide variety of cases, but in cases where children are involved it should be highly considered.
ReplyDelete