At issue in this case is whether the First Amendment ministerial exception should be expanded to categorically bar any Title VII or other hostile work environment claims by clergy and other ministerial employees of religious organizations. The purpose of the exception is to ensure that faith-based organizations have full control in hiring, firing and disciplining employees who perform religious duties. ADL joined a legal brief rejecting this expansion. The brief asserts that such an expansion…
4 Results
At issue in this case is the legality of new federal rules providing excessively broad religious and moral exemptions from the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive mandate. The mandate requires employer health insurance policies to cover prescription contraception for women without cost sharing. These discriminatory rules harm women because they effectively allow any employer, including public corporations, to opt out of the mandate. The prior rules already exempted houses of worship,…
At issue in these cases is a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Rule that creates an overly broad and preferential religious exemption for healthcare employees, contractors and volunteers. The Rule effectively provides these individuals who have religious objections to certain medical procedures, including abortion or sterilization, with the right to hinder or even block a hospital from performing such procedures. ADL’s briefs filed on behalf of religious and civil rights…
At stake in this case are two interim final rules (IFRs) promulgated by the Trump administration in October 2017 that significantly broadened the religious exemption to the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) contraception mandate. Prior mandate regulations accommodated houses of worship and religiously affiliated organizations. The new exemption, however, effectively repeals the contraception mandate, broadly allowing employers and universities to invoke religion or morality to block their…