Supreme Court appears likely to side with Catholic Church and Trump in key religious exemption case
The Supreme Court appeared likely to side with a Wisconsin-based Catholic Charities group in its fight with the government over a state ruling it says "distorts" and "undermines" its mission of caring for the sick and poor.
The Trump Justice Department has filed a brief in support of the charity, arguing exemptions in federal tax laws, like the Wisconsin tax law, protect the rights of religious institutions.
The group, Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Superior, Wisconsin, is appealing a ruling by the Wisconsin Supreme Court that found that because it does not conduct "typical" religious activity, it is not exempt from the state's costly unemployment payment program.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that a Wisconsin law exempting religious nonprofits from the program does not apply to the charity group, because it is not "operated primarily for religious purposes" and serves and employs non-Catholics and does not attempt to convert individuals, they said.
Trump Makes Endorsement In 'Important' Wisconsin Supreme Court Race
Catholic Charities, however, argues that helping the disabled, elderly and those living in poverty — regardless of their faith — is a core tenet of their religious practice.
Read On The Fox News App
The group's attorney, Eric Rassbach, with the religious liberty law firm Becket, argued during the hearing that Catholic teaching forbids Catholics from conditioning assistance on acceptance of the church's teachings.
"The Wisconsin Supreme Court got it wrong when it interpreted a state-law religious exemption to favor what it called 'typical' religious activity and when it held that helping the poor can't be religious, because secular people help the poor too," he said.
The group is seeking to be exempt from the state's unemployment compensation program so it can join the Wisconsin Catholic Church's private program, which they say would save them more money than paying into the state program.
Pope Francis' Doctors Considered Ending Treatment, Said 'There Was A Real Risk He Might Not Make It': Report
In nearly two hours of often heated debate, a majority on the bench seemed to agree the state engaged in an unnecessary entanglement over defining whether Catholic Charities should be treated differently from other similarly situated secular groups.
Attorneys for Wisconsin faced intense questioning from the justices about the state entangling itself in religious doctrine and practice, thus violating the First Amendment by denying a religious organization an otherwise available tax exemption because the organization does not meet the state's criteria for religious behavior.
"Isn't it a fundamental premise of our First Amendment that the state shouldn't be picking and choosing between religions," questioned Justice Neil Gorsuch.
"Doesn't it entangle the state tremendously when it has to go into a soup kitchen, send an inspector in, to see how much prayer is going on?" he asked.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson Raises Eyebrows With Comment That First Amendment 'Hamstrings' Government
Even some of the court's liberal justices seemed to have concerns with Wisconsin's ruling.
"There are lots of hard questions in this area," said Justice Elena Kagan. "But I thought it was pretty fundamental that we don't treat some religions better than other religions and we certainly don't do it based on the contents of the religious doctrine that those religions preach."
"The reason why we're so worried about entanglement is because it gets us enmeshed in the content of religious doctrine," she said.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett commented during the hearing that "the problem here is how to figure out what the line is."
Alan Rock, executive director of the Catholic Charities Bureau, told Fox News Digital that following the hearing, he is "confident the Supreme Court will ensure our freedom to serve all those in need according to our Catholic faith."
Exclusive: Groundbreaking New Prayer Book Designed For Demographic Most Targeted For Abortion
"The state of Wisconsin said that our work isn't religious. The state denied that our care for those in need is driven by our faith, simply because we serve everyone and do not try to convert those we serve. That view distorts the heart of our mission and undermines our ability to care for the most vulnerable," he said, adding, "We look forward to the Court's ruling."
Speaking with Fox News Digital after the hearing, Bishop James Powers, head of the Catholic Diocese of Superior, said that Wisconsin is "punishing Catholic Charities for following this example of Christian love."
"We do not help the needy because they are Catholic — we help them because we are Catholic," he said. "The Good Samaritan did not ask about the wounded man's faith: He simply saw a neighbor in need and responded with mercy. That is the model Catholic Charities has embraced since its founding."Original article source: Supreme Court appears likely to side with Catholic Church and Trump in key religious exemption case
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
10 minutes ago
- CNN
See moment Trump criticized Musk in Oval Office
See moment Trump criticized Musk in Oval Office President Trump said he was 'very disappointed' with Elon Musk, as the tech billionaire and former adviser continues to blast Trump's massive tax and spending cuts package. The bill is estimated to add $2.4 trillion to the deficit over the next decade. Musk responded on X in real-time saying that he never saw the bill before it passed and said the elimination of America's electric vehicle tax incentives has nothing to do with his opposition to Trump's bill. 01:15 - Source: CNN Vertical Politics of the Day 16 videos See moment Trump criticized Musk in Oval Office President Trump said he was 'very disappointed' with Elon Musk, as the tech billionaire and former adviser continues to blast Trump's massive tax and spending cuts package. The bill is estimated to add $2.4 trillion to the deficit over the next decade. Musk responded on X in real-time saying that he never saw the bill before it passed and said the elimination of America's electric vehicle tax incentives has nothing to do with his opposition to Trump's bill. 01:15 - Source: CNN Curtis Yarvin is inspiring a new generation of MAGA CNN's Hadas Gold interviews anti-democracy author Curtis Yarvin about his argument for an all-powerful executive in the White House. 02:24 - Source: CNN DNC Trolls Trump with Taco Truck The Democratic National Committee parked a taco truck outside the RNC headquarters in Washington DC Tuesday, as a way to troll the president over an acronym created by a Financial Times commentator about the president's frequent walk backs and pauses to his tariff's. 00:52 - Source: CNN Musk calls Trump's bill 'disgusting abomination' Elon Musk lashed out at President Donald Trump's agenda bill — which the president is pressuring GOP senators to support — calling it a 'disgusting abomination.' CNN's Kaitlan Collins reports. 00:59 - Source: CNN ICE chief defends agents wearing masks during immigration raids Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons is defending federal immigration agents for wearing masks during raids across the US, citing safety concerns. The tactic has sparked backlash and raised questions about transparency and accountability. 00:58 - Source: CNN Dana Bash presses Trump's budget chief about cancer cuts CNN's Dana Bash presses Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought on the Trump administration's proposal to cut non-defense spending by more than 22% — including deep reductions to education, food assistance, and billions in cancer research funding. As Vought defends the cuts and criticizes the NIH, Bash challenges him on the real-world impact to life-saving medical research. 01:35 - Source: CNN Trump reacts to video of Macron's apparent shove from wife President Trump was asked by reporters about the viral video appearing to show French President Emmanuel Macron being pushed by his wife Brigitte as they disembarked from a plane in Vietnam. Macron, at the time, quickly dismissed the video. 00:34 - Source: CNN Trans high school athlete wins events amid controversy A transgender athlete, whose participation sparked a national controversy and a temporary rule change, took first place in two of her three events in the California High School Track and Field Championship. 01:09 - Source: CNN South Carolina voter says 'no' to moving center South Carolina has often bucked the electoral trend – voting for candidates who lost in Iowa or New Hampshire and thus helping pick which candidate will move on to the general election. CNN's Jeff Simon spoke to multiple voters at a Democrat dinner in Columbia, South Carolina about the party's leadership and future. 01:25 - Source: CNN Hegseth warns 'threat China poses is real' US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, speaking to Asia's premier defense forum in Singapore, delivered a dire warning to the world: China's designs on Taiwan pose a threat to global peace and stability that requires 'our allies and partners do their part on defense.' While Hegseth made clear that Washington does not seek conflict with China, he stressed the Trump administration would not let aggression from Beijing stand. 00:50 - Source: CNN GOP senator pressed on Medicaid in heated town hall GOP Sen. Joni Ernst faced concerns from town hall attendees over potential cuts to Medicaid and SNAP programs as a result of President Donald Trump's sweeping domestic policy bill, saying at one point, 'Well, we all are going to die,' and insisting that those who are eligible for Medicaid will continue to receive payments. 01:12 - Source: CNN Fareed Zakaria breaks down Trump's tariff battle CNN's Fareed Zakaria breaks down what's going on with President Donald Trump's battle with the Supreme Court over tariffs. 00:58 - Source: CNN President Trump's timeline for things seems to almost always be 'in two weeks' President Donald Trump told reporters it will take about 'two weeks' to determine whether Russian President Vladimir Putin is serious about ending the war in Ukraine. That two week timeline, CNN's Abby Phillip says, is a familiar one. 01:48 - Source: CNN President Trump is on a pardoning spree President Donald Trump used his pardon power to grant clemency to a wave of individuals who had been convicted of crimes that range from public corruption, guns and even maritime-related offenses, according to multiple officials. CNN's Kaitlan Collins reports. 00:53 - Source: CNN Trump responds to Wall Street term 'TACO': Trump Always Chickens Out President Donald Trump was asked about "TACO," an acronym that means "Trump Always Chickens Out," which is used by Wall Street workers for his on-and-off approach to tariffs. Calling it "the nastiest question," Trump defended his tariff policy by calling it "negotiation." 01:13 - Source: CNN Harvard students and faculty speak out against Trump Harvard students and faculty spoke to CNN ahead of commencement as Donald Trump said the university should cap foreign enrollment. The Trump administration has recently sought to cancel $100 million in contracts with the school. 02:03 - Source: CNN
Vox
11 minutes ago
- Vox
The Supreme Court's blessedly narrow decision about religion in the workplace, explained
is a senior correspondent at Vox, where he focuses on the Supreme Court, the Constitution, and the decline of liberal democracy in the United States. He received a JD from Duke University and is the author of two books on the Supreme Court. In 2018, shortly before Justice Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation shifted the Supreme Court drastically to the right, Democratic Justice Elena Kagan laid out her strategy to keep her Court from becoming too ideological or too partisan. The secret, she said, is to take 'big questions and make them small.' Since then, Kagan and her Democratic colleagues have had mixed success persuading their colleagues to decide cases narrowly when they could hand right-wing litigants a sweeping victory. The Court has largely transformed its approach to religion, for example, though it does occasionally hand down religion cases that end less with a bang than with a whimper. SCOTUS, Explained Get the latest developments on the US Supreme Court from senior correspondent Ian Millhiser. Email (required) Sign Up By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Catholic Charities v. Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission will likely be remembered as such a whimper. The opinion is unanimous, and it is authored by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, one of Kagan's few fellow Democratic justices. The case could have ended in a sweeping decision that severely undermined the rights of many workers. Instead, Sotomayor's opinion focuses on a very narrow distinction between how Wisconsin law treats some religious groups as compared to others. Catholic Charities involved a Wisconsin law that exempts some nonprofits from paying unemployment taxes. This exemption applies only to employers that operate 'primarily for religious purposes.' Wisconsin's state supreme court determined that a 'religious purpose' includes activities like holding worship services or providing religious education, but it does not include secular services like feeding the poor, even if those secular activities are motivated by religion. Related The Supreme Court is leading a Christian conservative revolution The upshot is that Catholic Charities — an organization that is run by the Catholic Church but focuses primarily on secular charitable work — was not exempt from paying unemployment taxes. Sotomayor's decision reverses the state supreme court, so Catholic Charities will now receive an exemption. The Court largely avoids a fight over when businesses with a religious identity can ignore the law In a previous era, the Court was very cautious about permitting religious organizations to claim exemptions, in part because doing so would give some businesses 'an advantage over their competitors.' Such exemptions could also potentially permit employers with a religious identity to exploit their workers. In Tony and Susan Alamo Foundation v. Secretary of Labor (1985), for example, the Court considered a religious cult that operated a wide range of commercial businesses. These businesses paid no cash salaries or wages, although they did claim to give workers food, clothing, and shelter. The cult sought an exemption from minimum wage laws and similar workplace protections, but the Court disagreed. A too-broad decision in Catholic Charities could have potentially undermined decisions like Alamo Foundation, by giving some employers a broad right to ignore laws protecting their workers. But Sotomayor's opinion reads like it was crafted to hand Catholic Charities the narrowest possible victory. Under the state supreme court's decision in Catholic Charities, Sotomayor writes, a church-run nonprofit that does entirely secular charity work may not receive an exemption from paying unemployment taxes. But a virtually identical nonprofit that does the exact same work but also engages in 'proselytization' or limits its services to members of the same faith would receive an exemption. This distinction, Sotomayor says, violates the Supreme Court's long-standing rule that the government 'may not 'officially prefe[r]' one religious denomination over another.' The state may potentially require all charities to pay unemployment taxes. But it cannot treat religious charities that seek to convert people, or that limit their services to members of one faith, differently from religious charities that do not do this. In Sotomayor's words, an organization's 'eligibility for the exemption ultimately turns on inherently religious choices (namely, whether to proselytize or serve only co-religionists).' The crux of Sotomayor's opinion is that the decision whether to try to convert people, or whether to serve non-Catholics, is an inherently 'theological' choice. And states cannot treat different religious organizations differently because of their theological choices. Unfortunately, Sotomayor's opinion, which is a brief 15 pages, does not really define the term 'theological.' So it is likely that future courts will have to wrestle with whether other laws that treat some organizations differently do so because of theological differences or for some other reason. It's not hard to imagine a cult like the one in Alamo Foundation claiming that it has a theological objection to paying the minimum wage. But the Catholic Charities opinion also does not explicitly undermine decisions like Alamo Foundation. Nor does it embrace a more sweeping approach proposed by dissenting justices in the Wisconsin Supreme Court, who argued that nonprofits whose 'motivations are religious' may claim an exemption — regardless of what that nonprofit actually does.
New York Post
14 minutes ago
- New York Post
How Trump special envoy's move to bring Tate brothers to US caught president unaware
WASHINGTON — White House special envoy Ric Grenell caught President Trump off-guard when he advocated for the notorious Tate brothers to travel to Florida while awaiting trial in Romania earlier this year, leaving administration insiders frustrated and questioning Grenell's motives. In mid-February, Grenell, 58, approached Romanian Foreign Minister Emil Hurezeanu on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference and convinced him to release accused sex traffickers Andrew and Tristan Tate into US custody as they await trial on charges including rape and human trafficking in eastern Europe — without notifying anyone else in the administration, according to multiple sources and Hurezeanu's own admission. 'We learned about the Tate brothers after the fact,' a high-ranking White House source told The Post last week. Advertisement Grenell's actions — both in the matter of the Tates and in other delicate situations — exemplify the problems raised by special envoys, who play roles similar to ambassadors and assistant secretaries of state but often do so without the obligation to obey a formal chain of command and while carrying added responsibility as the president's personal representative. 'This was yet another example of Grenell going outside the chain of command to pursue his own goals, rather than the president's,' a source close the the White House familiar with discussions told The Post. 3 President Trump (right) walks with special envoy and interim Kennedy Center executive director Ric Grenell March 17. AP Advertisement On Feb. 27, 11 days after the Munich conference wrapped, the Tates, who were born in the US, touched down in Fort Lauderdale on a private jet. The same day, Trump hosted British Prime Minister Kier Starmer and was asked whether the president's administration had 'pressured' Romania to hand over the accused sexual predators. 'I don't know. You're saying he's on a plane right now?' a visibly confused Trump asked. 'I just know nothing about it. We'll check it out, we'll let you know.' Shortly after, when Starmer spoke about the brothers facing investigation in the United Kingdom, the president said to him, perplexed: 'You're aware? You're aware of this? I didn't know anything about it.' Risky game Advertisement While much of the media scorned Trump's comments, White House officials confirmed the president's surprise and bewilderment — and rounded on Grenell for putting the commander in chief in a tight spot. 'President Trump is on recording saying he know nothing about the Tate brothers' flight to Florida, so why did Ric Grenell even raise the issue with a Romanian official?' a source close the the White House familiar with discussions told The Post. 3 Andrew Tate, left, and his brother Tristan outside a Romanian police station May 21. AP The Tates' release caused bipartisan blowback — with big GOP names like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) as well as conservative media personalities Ben Shapiro and Megyn Kelly speaking out against the White House. Advertisement It also sparked a congressional inquiry by House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), who penned a letter asking the State Department to what extent the US government was involved in Romanian officials' decision to release the brothers. Almost immediately after the letter — which cc'd Grenell — was sent to the State Department, the envoy called to 'berate' a Raskin staffer, saying 'you're going to ruin my reputation,' according to a person familiar with the conversation. The interaction was first reported in early April by NOTUS. 'The State Department has failed to answer the Committee's questions and address our concerns,' the person said. 'All we have received was a short, non-substantive response from the State Department more than a month after the letter was sent.' While the blowback over the release has died down, the question that has puzzled Grenell's critics remains: Why risk the administration's credibility on Andrew and Tristan Tate? Grenell, a former ambassador to Germany and acting director of national intelligence, has been open about his support for the Tate brothers, whose followers among the far-right include longtime Trump confidant Roger Stone and Paul Ingrassia, the newly appointed head of the Office of Special Counsel. Andrew Tate has similarly expressed support for Grenell, tweeting the day before his release from Romania that the envoy is helping Trump 'sav(e) America along with the entire western world by extension.' Grenell also has extensive experience in eastern and southeastern Europe, dating back to at least his role facilitating peace talks between Serbia and Kosovo during Trump's first term. 'Was this motivated by a personal, political or business interest, or is he just a Tate Brothers fanboy?' asked a former friend of Grenell's. 'Either is a massive red flag.' Advertisement In a comment to the Financial Times in February, Grenell acknowledged his support for the Tates, 'as evident by my publicly available tweets' But he has since scrubbed all posts about the brothers, including a retweet of Stone crediting Grenell for 'securing the release of the Tates.' However, a Grenell associate says he kept up ties with the Tates even after their return, sitting ringside when the brothers made an appearance at the UFC 313 card in Las Vegas on March 8. 'Not Ric's job to make sure State knows' Since the Tate fiasco, Grenell has continued to ruffle feathers in his various roles, sounding a rare discordant note in an administration whose key players seem to be mainly on the same page. Advertisement 'It's like Festivus inside the White House, and the airing of the grievances is heavy on Grenell,' said one source close to President Trump, referencing an episode of the classic sitcom 'Seinfeld.' Last month, Grenell — in an apparent attempt to apply lessons from the Tate incident — briefly mentioned to Trump that he had reached a deal with Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro to return an American detainee, but left key White House and State Department officials without any clue of his foreign dealings, according to senior administration officials. 'State Department was intentionally left in the dark, as was Rubio,' confirmed Tactic Global lobbyist Caroline Wren, who told The Post she helps Grenell with his public relations and worked on the Venezuela initiative with him. 'It's not Ric's job to make sure State knows.' Advertisement 3 Venezuela President Nicolas Maduro speaks to Iranian officials in Caracas last month. via REUTERS Wren did not elaborate on why the department was left out of the loop, but Grenell had asked Maduro to free Air Force veteran Joe St. Clair as a sign that the dictator was willing to work with the Trump administration, multiple sources say. In return, Grenell suggested to Maduro that Trump would extend Chevron's license to import Venezuelan oil — but that was news to the administration, which has consistently supported the president's desire to expire the license May 27, according to senior officials. Some far-right influencers — such as firebrand Laura Loomer and many of Grenell's closest associates, including Wren — say the license should be extended to block China from cornering the Venezuelan oil market. Advertisement When The Post contacted Grenell May 15 to ask whether he was holding discussions with Caracas about extending the Chevron license, Grenell directed another lobbyist — former Rep. Aaron Schock (R-Ill.) — to contact The Post to push the China angle. Schock, who according to Wren also helps Grenell with PR, also consults for South Florida oil magnate Harry Sargeant, whose license to operate his oil-trading company in Venezuela was canceled by Trump's anti-Maduro policy, a former friend of Sargeant's told The Post. Schock did not reply to a request for comment on his association with Sargeant, whom Wren called a 'good friend' she 'talks to all the time.' Sargeant, however, denied that Schock or Grenell were advocating on his behalf. On a more ominous note, law enforcement sources say Grenell's deal with Maduro to return a single detainee could encourage Caracas officials to direct the Tren de Aragua cartel to kidnap more Americans for use as bargaining chips to reduce US sanctions. The FBI has said that the Venezuelan dictator controls the brutal cartel recently listed as a foreign terrorist organization. The same day the Chevron oil license expired, the State Department issued a stark travel warning to Americans, urging them not to visit Venezuela due to risk of wrongful detention, torture, kidnapping and crime. Closer to home, Grenell — who is also president and interim executive director of the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts — caused another firestorm when he dismissed center vice president Floyd Brown May 28 after Brown refused to disown comments promoting 'traditional marriage' and criticizing the influence of gay staffers in the Republican party. 'The only explanation is the one given to me at the time of my firing: 'Floyd, you must recant your belief in traditional marriage and your past statements on the topic, or you will be fired,'' Brown posted to X May 29. 'Needless to say, I refused to recant and was shown the door. My beliefs are much more common to Biblical Christianity.' As multiple sources pointed out, the firing appeared to run counter to Trump's main reason for appointing Grenell, who is openly gay, in the first place: To rid the DC venue of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion policies. 'From being rebuked on the Chevron license, to his connection to the Tate Brothers, to allegations of firing a Kennedy staffer over Christian beliefs, Ric Grenell keeps finding new and creative ways to embarrass himself and those around him,' a source close the the White House familiar with the situation said. The State Department, Romanian Foreign Ministry, Schock, Grenell and an attorney for the Tates did not respond to requests for comment.
