FFRF warns of far-reaching consequences after Supreme Court agrees to hear Catholic Charities case

[milestogo]

The Freedom From Religion Foundation is sounding the alarm over the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to hear a case that could exempt a religiously affiliated nonprofit from unemployment insurance. The Supreme Court on Dec. 13 agreed to hear the Catholic Charities Bureau v. Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission case. FFRF, a national state/church watchdog, had filed a friend-of-the-court brief before the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which agreed with FFRF’s position that the Catholic Charities Bureau and its subsidiaries were not exempt from unemployment taxes.

The Catholic group — based out of Superior, Wis. — seeks to have several subsidiary nonprofits exempt from Wisconsin’s unemployment tax, claiming they should not pay unemployment tax, whether or not they provide religious services, because their work is religiously motivated. Yet the charities’ purposes are not to espouse the Catholic faith, staff don’t participate in religious services with clients, and some of the organizations don’t mention faith in their statements. And they don’t serve only Catholics.

Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul urged the high court to stay out of the case because there was no authority split, also noting that the groups receive much of their funding from the public. FFRF’s friend-of-the-court brief urged the Wisconsin Supreme Court to keep the rights of workers in mind, such as countless Catholic hospital workers who could become ineligible to claim unemployment, even though their jobs have no religious functions. “The special exemption that the Catholic Charities Bureau is seeking would naturally extend to countless other nonprofits,” explains FFRF Senior Counsel Sam Grover. “Thousands of nonreligious employees at hospitals, colleges and other organizations could lose their unemployment coverage if the Supreme Court overturns the decision.”

Adds FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor: “The high court’s decision to take this case is alarming, and reveals its activist agenda. We’re witnessing an aggressive push by religious organizations to obtain special privileges that threaten to undermine the rights and freedoms of others, particularly vulnerable populations.” FFRF plans on filing a friend-of-the-court brief before the Supreme Court.

https://ffrf.org/news/releases/ffrf-warns-of-far-reaching-consequences-after-supreme-court-agrees-to-hear-catholic-charities-case/

[mountain grammy]

1. Alarming doesn't begin to describe it.

This is a radical court bribed by riches made from people’s suffering.

[milestogo]

3. Think of all the people who work for Catholic Charities

Then expand that to think of all the people who work for "faith-based" schools, hospitals, and other charities who might choose to follow this if they are allowed to. It can be any religion.

Millions of people who lose their jobs will not have the safety net of unemployment insurance. Its sickening.

[kirby]

4. Who says they will not have a safety net?

Sounds like it could be a don't tax me situation, but everyone else has to subsidize the unemployment funds to still cover them.

[milestogo]

7. Really?

I thought that if your employer doesn't pay in to unemployment funds, the employees are unable to collect.

When I do contract work I am offered a choice between W-2 and independent contractor. With W-2 the hourly rate is less, but I can collect unemployment when it ends. When people are independent, they cannot collect anything.

[kirby]

8. I hear you and you are correct...

But sounds like some sort of 'exception' that the religious majority SCOTUS could apply.

[wnylib]

10. Alarming and appalling. The end result will be twofold.

1) The Catholic Church as an institution will be able to exert control over people who are not members of the church and will set a precedent for other churches to do the same.

2) Credentialed and talented people will prefer working for agencies that provide coverage. That will apply to Catholics as well as non Catholics because the Catholic Church is reducing costs and closing some churches and agencies due to the expense of abuse payouts and decreasing attendance and donations. With fewer candidates to choose from for paid positions, they can end up with lesser qualified employees, creating a feedback loop of people not using their agencies.

[Sneederbunk]

2. SCOTUS is comprised of 6 Catholics and 1 former Catholic.

What could go wrong?

[Initech]

5. Religious super PACs, here we come!

And America's slide into becoming a totalitarian hell hole continues!

[Johonny]

6. Musk declares SpaceX a church

Tomorrow's headlines today

[Wild blueberry]

9. Time to revoke tax-exempt status for religious organizations, aka churches

If they're doing business, they are a business.

[MLWR]

11. Time to revoke tax-exempt status for religious organizations, aka churches

That will definitely NOT happen with this SCOTUS (Opus Dei etc.).

[dlk]

12. It never ceases to amaze how some SCOTUS judges, theoretically educated legal scholars, seem to have so little

Comprehension the Establishment Clause. It's not a difficult read and is very straightforward. Unfortunately, too many of the right wing justices are legislating from the bench, a purported anathema for Republicans, instead of doing their job of interpreting what has already been written.

Religion and government are to be kept separate, period, full stop.

Religion is a personal and private matter, and shouldn't be imposed on our citizens by zealot justices or by zealot billionaires giving gifts to justices.

[Wiz Imp]

15. They comprehend it just fine. They just disagree with it so the choose to act as if it doesn't exist.

[Wiz Imp]

19. Agree 100%

[dlk]

27. Their bloated level of entitlement is astounding

Who do they think they are?

[Geechie]

13. What kind of shithole religious organization

has to be forced to take care of its own workers?

[milestogo]

14. Roman Catholicism

If you didn't get screwed the first time, hang on, your time will come.

[lonely bird]

18. While not unemployment insurance...

My wife taught at the Catholic high school that she graduated from after we moved back near where we grew up. She had a small accident at work for which she submitted a workmen’s comp claim. The school is a diocesan school and the diocese is self-insured. They proceeded to delay, insult and refuse to pay. We hired a lawyer who had long experience with workmen’s comp fights. He said the diocese was one the three worst organizations he dealt with. The diocese lost the initial decision and the two appeals they were entitled to. In the end they spent more money than if they had simply paid.

Enough of this religious bullshit. They are a business, period. It is time to treat them as no different than any other business. What their business is, is not relevant to issues such as unemployment insurance.

[milestogo]

20. I've heard that the religious orders are "self-insured" also.

The problem is that some of the orders (the nuns) are dying off. They aren't recruiting young women who want to be nuns. The Church promises to take care of their own for life, but I'm skeptical that they can actually afford to do this.

[Noel Kums]

22. Attacking Catholicism is apparently always acceptable here. It's like a hobby.

Every organized religion or belief system has its good & bad individuals and organizations.

[muriel_volestrangler]

23. Yes, attacking Catholicism is always acceptable. It's a free country.

That means people are free to attack Catholicism. And it this case, a Catholic organization is trying to either screw its employees, or to freeload on the rest of the USA. So attacking it is a moral good.

"Every organized religion or belief system has its good & bad individuals and organizations"

And that's why attacking Catholicism is acceptable, just as it's acceptable to attack any religion when its organizations are shitheads.

What I can't work out is why you've put a puke emoji between the 2 lines in which you seem to understand the concept, and necessity, of freedom of speech.

[milestogo]

24. Well said.

[lonely bird]

25. It isn't about attacking Catholicism

It is about religion claiming privileges which have nothing to do with worship and dogma.

[J_William_Ryan]

26. "The high court's decision to take this case is alarming, and reveals its activist agenda."

Indeed.

And this is just the beginning.

Expect the Trump Court overturn settled, accepted Establishment Clause jurisprudence – such as allowing mandatory Christian payer in public schools, allowing Christian icons and worship imagery in public schools and other government venues, eventually allowing the codification of an official state religion.