Federal courts have consistently ruled against government interference in decisions made by religious organizations in the hiring and firing of clergy, thus creating what is known as the “ministerial exception” to many anti-discrimination laws. In a 2011 case before the Supreme Court, the Justice Department challenged this exception, unsuccessfully; but, as David Bernstein explains, the story may not be over:

The Obama Justice Department argued not just that [the particular case at hand] did not qualify for the ministerial exception, but that the ministerial exception should be rejected entirely. So, for example, a very liberal jurisdiction such as San Francisco could require the Catholic Church to hire male nuns or female priests, and the church would have no constitutionally valid freedom-of-religion defense. . . .

When the case reached the Supreme Court, the justices were incredulous at the government’s position that religious organizations get no more constitutional protection than any other employer who promotes a point of view. . . . Not surprisingly, the court ruled unanimously against the administration, [reaffirming] the ministerial exception. . . .

That’s the good news. The bad news is that, even though the argument failed to get any votes this time, the issue will inevitably come back to the Supreme Court in the future. By then, restrictions on religious freedom in the name of prohibiting “discrimination” may have become so commonplace that doing away with the ministerial exception could seem like the next logical step.

In October, a young Mauritanian national murdered an Orthodox Jewish man on his way to synagogue in Chicago. This alone should be sufficient sign of the rising dangers of anti-Semitism. Nathan Diament explains how the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act (AAA) can, if passed, make American Jews safer:

We were off to a promising start when the AAA sailed through the House of Representatives in the spring by a generous vote of 320 to 91, and 30 senators from both sides of the aisle jumped to sponsor the Senate version. Then the bill ground to a halt.

Fearful of antagonizing their left-wing activist base and putting vulnerable senators on the record, especially right before the November election, Democrats delayed bringing the AAA to the Senate floor for a vote. Now, the election is over, but the political games continue.

You can’t combat anti-Semitism if you can’t—or won’t—define it. Modern anti-Semites hide their hate behind virulent anti-Zionism. . . . The Anti-Semitism Awareness Act targets this loophole by codifying that the Department of Education must use the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s working definition of anti-Semitism in its application of Title VI.