What's in a Name? The Definition of "Minister" in Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Abstract

In January 2012, the United States Supreme Court handed down a decision in Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) that confirmed the existence of the “ministerial exception” previously established in every circuit court. In applying the exception, the Court radically undermined the Sixth’s Circuit’s firmly established “primary duties” test for determining who should qualify as a “minister” in applying the exception. The Court attacked the core factors used in the “primary duties” test yet refused to set down any new guidelines. The Court’s unwillingness to clarify the definition of a minister has created confusion that will likely lead religious employers to claim ministerial exceptions for a broader class of employees than in previous employment-related lawsuits. This case fails to resolve the existing split in the circuit courts regarding how to determine who is a minister, and the broad parameters used by the Court have exacerbated the problem.This Note first discusses the history of the ministerial exception, its relationship to the First Amendment, and its development over time, including an analysis of Hosanna-Tabor’s holding and its new definition of minister. This Note next analyzes the impact of the Court’s failure to set out a clear test for determining who is a minister. Finally, the Note explores the potentially problematic outcomes of future employment law cases based on the new, loose factors the Court described.