In light of the more recent Hosanna-Tabor decision, this Comment seeks to answer these questions by extending the reasoning behind the ministerial exception to the university context in order to build a foundation upon which a future exception can be built to ensure that religious student groups are sufficiently free to choose their own leaders. Part II sets forth a brief history of the ministerial exception and its application in the circuit courts. Part III addresses two recent Supreme Court cases, Martinez and Hosanna-Tabor, and their practical effect on religious liberty, as well as the public’s perception of both cases. Part IV then offers observations and comparisons regarding antidiscrimination legislation and their university based counterparts and the parties affected by both, as well as a brief explanation of the lack of distinction between governmental imposition of monetary penalties and governmental withholding of benefits. Part V explores the hypothetical application of current case law regarding the ministerial exception to the relationship between a student-chapter president of Christian Legal Society—the party bringing suit in Martinez—and the organization on the whole.
All For One, And One for All-Comers! University Nondiscrimination Policies in Light of Hosanna-Tabor and the Ministerial Exception,
41 Pepp. L. Rev.
Available at: http://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/plr/vol41/iss1/4