How has the exemption from the nondiscrimination provision of title VII been interpreted by the Court?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from EAST BAY ASIAN LOCAL DEVEOPMENT v. State, 102 Cal.Rptr.2d 280, 13 P.3d 1122, 24 Cal.4th 693 (Cal. 2000):

The court then applied the Lemon test to the exemption and, in doing so, considered the impact of the exemption from the nondiscrimination provision of title VII. The first prong of that test, that the law have a secular purpose, was met even though the exemption benefited only religious organizations. The court explained that having a secular purpose does not require that the purpose of the challenged law be unrelated to religion. The secular purpose test is aimed at preserving governmental neutrality in religious matters. "Under the Lemon analysis, it is a permissible legislative purpose to alleviate significant governmental interference with the ability of religious organizations to define and carry out their religious missions." (Corporation of Presiding Bishop v. Amos, supra, 483 U.S. at p. 335, 107 S.Ct. 2862.) The court next examined the impact of the law to which the exemption applied and concluded that, notwithstanding a prior limited exclusion for religious activities, the title VII ban on discrimination continued to impose a significant burden on religious organizations by requiring them to predict, on pain of serious sanctions if they were wrong, which of their activities a court would deem to be religious. (483 U.S. at pp. 335-336, 107 S.Ct. 2862.)

Other Questions


How have courts interpreted section 1016.5 of the California Immigration Code and how have the courts interpreted the word 'court' in that section? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted the arbitration provisions in determining whether an arbitration provision applies to a certain controversy? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted the interpretation of a federal agency's interpretation of the California Civil Code? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted the provisions of the California Civil Code former section 1673 in the context of restraints on business operations and commercial dealings? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted section 1018 of the California Criminal Code when a defendant makes a statement in open court that authorizes or adopts a motion to withdraw his plea? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted or interpreted the word "or" and "and" in legislation? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted the "small facilities" exemption? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted the interpretation of a motor vehicle insurance contract in the context of an arbitration? (California, United States of America)
Can a defense interpreter only interpret words of the witness interpreter at trial? (California, United States of America)
How have the courts interpreted estoppel provisions in a life insurance policy where the insurer knew that the insured's representation concerning prior illnesses was false? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.