Naomi Schaefer Riley on Catholic schools being sued by fired teachers. Both cases have been blogged on here in the past: the Queens teacher fired for being pregnant and single, and the Wilmington, DE teacher fired from an Ursuline-run high school for signing an abortion-rights petition and volunteering at Planned Parenthood. Here’s the interesting part of the piece:

Ms. Curay-Cramer is arguing that she was discriminated against because of her views on abortion. Her lawyer, Thomas Neuberger, has suggested that such views, as well as her Planned Parenthood activities, are protected by provisions in the Civil Rights Act, particularly those ensuring equal treatment for women who are pregnant–and, apparently, those who support such treatment. This part of his argument feels quite strained.

But there is another part of the plaintiff’s case that is less implausible. Mr. Neuberger claims that Ursuline is not entitled to the religious exemption from nondiscrimination statutes because it is not religious enough. He notes that the school is independent of the diocese; it hires non-Catholics; and it doesn’t offer employment contracts with a "cardinal’s clause." Such a clause, not uncommon in the workings of religious schools, would mandate that teachers avoid taking a public stance against the church’s teachings.

Mr. Picarello, defending Ursuline Academy, believes that this argument cannot stand. "Ever since Mitchell v. Helms," he says, citing a 2000 case in which the Supreme Court upheld a program giving public dollars to religious schools, "the court has suggested that it doesn’t want to make distinctions between super-religious and lukewarm religious." It shouldn’t matter which doctrines Ursuline chooses to uphold. Theoretically, the school could fire someone for supporting the death penalty but keep someone who doesn’t go to confession. "It can be done retail rather than wholesale," he says.