Tuesday, December 18, 2018
Page 1
Ninth Circuit:
Catholic Teacher Wasn’t a Minister, Can Bring Discrimination Claim
By a MetNews Staff Writer
The “ministerial exception” that bars ministers from suing religious institutions for wrongful termination does not bar an action under the Americans with Disabilities Act by a woman who was fired as a teacher at a Catholic school in Torrance, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held yesterday, explaining that her catechistical duties were too limit for immunity to apply.
The majority’s opinion was written by Circuit Judge Michelle T. Friedland, who was joined by Circuit Judge Paul J. Watford. Circuit Judge D. Michael Fisher of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, sitting by designation, wrote separately to express his agreement with District Court Judge Terry J. Hatter of the Central District of California, who found that the ministerial exception did apply to bar the suit.
The teacher, Kristen Biel, was fired from St. James Catholic School after telling then-Principal Mary Margaret Kreuper that she had breast cancer and would need time off for treatment.
Ministerial Exception
Friedland pointed to the U.S. Supreme Court 2012 decision in Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & School v. E.E.O.C. There, Cheryl Perich was not permitted to bring an ADA lawsuit after being fired from a Lutheran school, in part because she was hired for her extensive religious training and was classified by the school and herself as a “called” teacher whose role was a spiritual vocation.
The term “minister” is given broader meaning under the test than its usual definition.
Friedland’s opinion lists the Hosanna-Tabor court’s considerations as “(1) whether the employer held the employee out as a minister, (2) whether the employee’s title reflected ministerial substance and training, (3) whether the employee held herself out as a minister, and (4) whether the employee’s job duties included ‘important religious functions.’ ”
Watford’s Concerns
At oral argument in Pasadena in July 11, Watford expressed concern at not ending the inquiry at the fourth consideration, which he saw as the trend in post-Hosanna-Tabor case law. Biel, he noted, devoted some amount of lesson time to teaching her fifth graders Catholic theology, and worked religious messages into secular subjects.
“I’ll tell you what troubles me,” Watford told Andrew S. Pletcher, who argued on behalf of Biel. “For a teacher who is involved in conveying the tenets of the faith, right, if that’s a part of their [sic] duties, I just see a real danger if that’s not enough to qualify them for the ministerial exception.”
He added:
“We can’t be involved in judging whether the teacher was, you know, sufficiently, adhered sufficiently closely to the teachings of the religion, right, so that’s why it seems like we need a buffer to keep us, to keep us as federal courts out of that. And I think I understand why the trend in the case law is going against you and I’m just trying to get some sense from you what basis do we have for resisting that trend, as I see it.”
Cases Distinguished
Pletcher agreed that the trend is for courts to apply the exception to religious school teachers. He cited Grussgott v. Milwaukee Jewish Day School, Inc., a decision this year where the Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held the exception barred a similar claim to Biel’s but, he argued, that case and similar ones are factually distinct from the one at bar.
Watford, in joining the majority opinion, was apparently convinced. Friedland wrote:
“Even assuming Grussgott was correctly decided, which we are not sure it was, the plaintiff in Grussgott more closely resembled Perich than Biel does. Although the plaintiff in Grussgott lacked a formal religious title, she had obtained a certification in a Jewish curricular program called Tal Am—a curriculum that involved integrating religious teachings into Hebrew lessons, as the Seventh Circuit noted in its analysis of the plaintiff’s job title….The plaintiff had also ‘tout[ed] significant religious teaching experience,’ which ‘was a critical factor in the school hiring her.’…She also prayed and performed rituals with her students.”
Biel, in contrast, was titled by the school as a “Grade 5 Teacher,” had no religious training prior to being hired, and had taken the job because she needed work rather than as a response to a religious imperative. A Catholic herself, Biel joined the students in daily prayer, but those prayers were always led by students, not the teacher; at her trips with the students to the school’s monthly religious service, her sole duty was to keep her wards on their best behavior.
“No federal court of appeals has applied the ministerial exception in a case that bears so little resemblance to Hosanna-Tabor,” Friedland declared. “We decline St. James’s invitation to be the first.”
Dissent From Distinctions
Fisher disagreed that Biel was dissimilar to the Hosanna-Tabor plaintiff. The dissenting judge wrote:
“In considering the complete picture of Biel’s employment, I am struck by the importance of her stewardship of the Catholic faith to the children in her class. Biel’s Grade 5 Teacher title may not have explicitly announced her role in ministry, but the substance reflected in her title demonstrates that she was a Catholic school educator with a distinctly religious purpose. The religious purpose of Catholic school educators is not new to the federal courts. The Supreme Court has long ‘recognized the critical and unique role of the teacher in fulfilling the mission of a church-operated school.’ ”
He continued:
“Biel expressly acknowledged this purpose in her contract, and committed herself to performing all ‘duties and responsibilities...within [the] overriding commitment’ of St. James to ‘develop and promote a Catholic School Faith Community within the philosophy of Catholic education.’ Biel acknowledged that her continued employment was dependent upon her demonstrated ability to do so. Drawing all inferences in Biel’s favor, it is still impossible to ignore that her position at St. James was pervaded by religious purpose.”
EEOC’s Brief
In an amicus curiae brief, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission argued:
This appeal offers this Court an opportunity to clarify the balance between two important sets of legal protections. On the one hand, the First Amendment’s guarantees of religious freedom (both the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause) protect religious institutions from government interference with their choice of ecclesiastical leaders….On the other hand, congressionally enacted civil rights laws, including the ADA, require these same religious institutions, like other employers, to refrain from discriminating against their employees based on disability and other protected traits such as race and sex….
“The district court here attempted to strike a balance between Biel’s claim that the school’s failure to renew her teaching contract constituted unlawful disability discrimination and the school’s claim that Biel should be considered ‘clergy’ and, therefore, that the school is exempt from having to defend its decision not to retain her. In so doing, however, the court misapplied the relevant legal precedent and struck the wrong balance. The decision should be reversed.”
The case is Biel v. St. James School, No. 17-55180.
In addition to Pletcher, of JML Law in Woodland Hills, Susan R. Oxford of the general counsel office at the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission—which filed an amicus curiae brief in support of the teacher—argued in Pasadena. Jack S. Sholkoff represented the school before the panel.
Disgraced Administrators
Kreuper and former St. James teacher Lana Chang, both members of Roman Catholic religious order the Sisters of St. Joseph of Carondelet, were discovered by the school earlier this year to have embezzled at least $500,000 during their tenure as administrators.
The two former administrators have been accused of using the money to buy themselves Volvos and go on gambling sprees in Las Vegas. They reportedly claimed that a wealthy relative of Chang was supplying them with the money for their pursuits.
Both women retired this year.
Copyright 2018, Metropolitan News Company