Acting Labor Secretary Patrick Pizzella didn’t let his temporary status stop him from advancing a key new policy guidance Aug. 14 — one that should redound very much to the benefit of religious liberty. Let’s hope the proposed new rule makes it all the way through the regulatory process.
Pizzella and his aides describe the proposed rule as “clarifying civil rights protections for religious organizations.” Technically, that’s true, but it’s a bit of an understatement. What it really does is re-expand protections that had been misguidedly narrowed by the Obama administration. The change would be substantive and important. It also would be more in line with the text and reasoning behind the First Amendment’s protections for the “free exercise” of religion.
Citing a “rich history” of regulations, court decisions, and statutes, including the express language of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the proposed rule “would clarify that religious organizations may make employment decisions consistent with their sincerely held religious tenets and beliefs without fear of sanction by the federal government.” It also “should be construed to provide the broadest protection of religious exercise recognized by the Constitution and other laws, such as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.”
Practically, what does this mean? Well, for one example (purely hypothetical), it might allow a church-based elementary school (if it receives federal funds) to require its staff to abide by faith-based restrictions against cohabitation. It might allow faith-based charitable organizations to refuse to employ people who advocate for unrestricted abortion.
The point is not whether a ban on cohabitation or abortion advocacy is good or bad. The point is that as long as they don’t violate other constitutional protections (such as ones outlawing racial discrimination), a religious school or organization’s policies can make demands consonant with genuine beliefs that the organizations hold as being crucial to their faith practices. If faith is a central part of the organization’s mission, the organization has just as much right to insist on standards of conduct or viewpoints as do, say, the Sierra Club or the People for the American Way.
The proposed rule is open for official public comment until Sept. 16. Anti-religious organizations will fight it, but the proposal is a good one. Let’s hope it gets finalized and implemented, as is.
