The title of this post is not hyperbole.

Every once in a while a court case comes along that could have profound ramifications for our liberty. Many times, everyone knows about these cases. Sometimes they do not. Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC could be one of those cases.

This particular case is about the Ministerial Exception. In a nutshell, the Ministerial Exception allows for religious organizations “to decide for themselves, free from state interference, matters of church government as well as those of faith and doctrine.”

Based on this right, twelve federal circuits have recognized the “ministerial exception.” (The Federal Circuit has no jurisdiction over cases that could present the issue.) The ministerial exception bars lawsuits that interfere in the relationship between a religious organization and employees who perform religious functions — most obviously, lawsuits seeking to compel a religious organization to reinstate such an employee or seeking to impose monetary liability for the selection of such employees. As the first court adopting the ministerial exception explained: “The relationship between an organized church and its ministers is its lifeblood”; allowing the state to interfere in that relationship — effectively allowing judges and juries to pick ministers — would produce “the very opposite of that separation of church and State contemplated by the First Amendment.” McClure v. Salvation Army, 460 F.2d 553, 558, 560 (5th Cir. 1972).

That seems all well and good and in line with our traditions.  What was at stake in the Hosanna-Tabor case is whether or not such protections from discrimination lawsuits extend to employees such as teachers and whether or not they can be fired for religious reasons under the exception or not.  I say that this is what the case WAS about because the Obama administration’s DOJ just seriously upped the ante on this case.

The DOJ, in an amicus brief filed on the case, is not satisfied to argue in favor of limiting religious freedom so that the government can dictate what kind of other employees are not subject to the ministerial exception, the DOJ is arguing that there should not even be a Ministerial Objection. In essence, the DOJ is arguing that government regulation should be able to dictate what kind of ministers a religious organization can hire and fire, first amendment be damned.

Just so you know how crazy this is, the militant secularists at Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the ACLU did not even make this argument. Ed Whelan writes:

DOJ’s position — which is even more hostile to the ministerial exemption than the amicus brief filed by Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the ACLU — thus threatens to expose churches and other religious institutions to a broad array of employment-discrimination claims that the ministerial-exception has long shielded them from.

So according to the Government, there is no first amendment anymore. If Obama succeeds, we will have gone a long way toward the Chinese model of the Patriotic Church. Maybe that is the point.