RFRA and exclusion of antidiscrimination law

[Prof. Steven D. Jamar]

Volokh, Eugene wrote:

>         1)  Federal law doesn't provide a BFOQ defense in race
> discrimination cases.

Which raises interesting issues on things like casting Ms. Saigon.

I wonder about race as a BFOQ for clergy - the hypothetical White Tip Top
Church which allows only whites as priests.

Surely the Catholics can limit priesthood to males, though not white
males.  And surely Jews can limit rabbis to males, and some sects perhaps
to only certain white males with the proper parentage.

But I suspect the Unitarian Universalists would have some trouble asserting
race or sex as a BFOQ - which of course they would not and do not.

But what if a particular congregation of UU's said it wanted only a white
male minister because they were uncomfortable with anyone else, because
that was what they were accustomed to, because on such a person could lead
them with the trust and spirit they need?

I assume this does not qualify in the face of the national UU position and
because the reasons are social or personal rather than doctrinal.

--
Steven D. Jamar
Professor of Law
Director, Legal Research & Writing Program
Howard University School of Law
2900 Van Ness Street N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20008
United States of America

vox:  202-806-8017  fax:  202-806-8428
email:  sjamar at law.howard.edu