Catholic Charities Bureau, Inc. v. Wisconsin Labor & Industry Review Commission
In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court delivered a major win for faith-based organizations, ruling that the government cannot decide what makes a ministry “religious enough” to qualify for legal protections.
The state of Wisconsin denied Catholic Charities Bureau a religious exemption from unemployment insurance taxes, arguing that because the ministry serves people of all faiths and does not engage in proselytizing, it was not sufficiently religious. The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected this flawed reasoning, affirming that genuine faith cannot be measured by who a ministry serves or how it expresses its beliefs.
This ruling is a significant affirmation of religious freedom. It confirms that ministries have the constitutional right to define their mission and methods of service without government interference. Whether a ministry chooses to evangelize, serve, or do both, it remains protected under the First Amendment. Importantly, it limits the power of government agencies to impose their own theological interpretations when determining what qualifies as religious work.
United States v. Skrmetti
Another significant decision saw the U.S. Supreme Court uphold Tennessee’s Senate Bill 1 (SB1), which bans gender-transition treatments for minors, meaning the law will remain in full effect and setting a critical precedent for similar legislation across the nation.
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld Tennessee’s Senate Bill 1 (SB1), which prohibits certain gender-transition treatments for minors, including puberty blockers and hormone therapy. Opponents argued the law violated a constitutional right to access such care and discriminated against transgender youth. The Court disagreed, finding the law was based on age and medical judgment—not gender identity. The justices emphasized the state’s legitimate interest in protecting minors from treatments that may be irreversible or still considered experimental.
With over half the states enacting similar laws, this ruling has wide-reaching implications. For ministries that hold traditional views, the decision offers reassurance: the court did not establish a constitutional right for minors to receive gender-transition treatments. This provides space for pastoral care rooted in doctrinal convictions when counseling families navigating questions of identity. At the same time, ministries with differing theological perspectives should be mindful of the diverse legal landscape. In some states, minors may seek gender-transition care without parental involvement—raising complex considerations concerning parental rights and pastoral responsibility.
Brotherhood Mutual is pleased to provide Legal Assist as a complimentary resource. Services through Legal Assist aim to provide general risk management guidance to our current and prospective policyholders.
While the information provided in this resource is intended to be helpful, it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney in your area. Please note that no attorney/client relationship is established through this process, and no legal advice will be provided. We strongly recommend regular consultations with a licensed local attorney as part of your risk management program.
