A kosher butcher in Minnesota was fired after more than 10 years of successful employment when a new rabbi found his qualifications religiously suspect. The court had to decide whether to treat the case as religious or secular.

What happened. AER Services is a business that provides slaughtering services for companies that sell kosher meat products, such as ConAgra. Under Jewish dietary laws, meat is not considered kosher, i.e., fit for consumption by observant Jews, unless the animal has been slaughtered according to religious rituals by a specially trained kosher butcher, called a shochet. According to Jewish tradition, a shochet must be certified by an Orthodox rabbi and must himself be "God-fearing in the public's eye."

Leo Maruani went to work for AER as a shochet in 1993. He worked at an AER plant in Rapid City, South Dakota, from 1995 until 2002. In 2002, Maruani relocated to Minnesota at AER's request and began managing a plant in St. Paul.

In 2003, Rabbi Aryeh Ralbag became the certifying authority for ConAgra's Hebrew National brand. Ralbag reviewed Maruani's qualifications and decided that he was not "God-fearing in the public's eye." He offered several reasons: Maruani drove to synagogue services instead of walking as required; he did not wear a full beard and dark suit; and his wife, a convert to Judaism, did not cover her hair or use the Jewish ritual bath.

AER gave Maruani several months to bring his qualifications in compliance with Ralbag's requirements. He was ordered to move to an Orthodox Jewish neighborhood by October 2005 or risk termination. In September 2005, Maruani informed AER that he had found an apartment but wanted written assurances that AER would not make additional requests if he moved. AER terminated Maruani on September 8, 2005.

Maruani sued AER in Minnesota state court and AER removed the case to federal district court. In his complaint Maruani claimed that AER discriminated against him on the basis of religion in violation of the Minnesota Human Rights Act. He also claimed AER violated the Minnesota Whistleblower Act: Specifically, Maruani claimed that AER was engaged in providing false visas to illegal aliens and laundering money, and retaliated against him for refusing to take part in the schemes. He also claimed AER had committed several other offenses, such as not submitting a workers' compensation claim he made after being injured on the job. AER asked the court to dismiss the claims.

What the court said. AER claimed that the court had no jurisdiction over Maruani's claims. The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." When a matter involves theological controversy, church discipline, or the conformity of the members of a church to the standards of morals required of them, courts will not consider it or make a decision about it. Courts have a long history of refusing jurisdiction over the acts of religious organizations.

It is not always easy to determine whether an employer and a position are strictly religious. The court must first determine whether the employer displays "substantial religious character." They then consider whether the job is secular or religious in nature. In this case, AER was clearly a secular employer, operating as a for-profit business and not owned by any church; it was thus not entitled to First Amendment religious protection. Maruani's job, on the other hand, clearly was religious in nature as it involved slaughtering animals according to Jewish ritual. Inquiring into Maruani's religious discrimination claim would involve the court's consideration of the rabbi's rules and Maruani's own religious conformity; accordingly, the court dismissed that claim.

The court was not sure, however, that the other counts of Maruani's complaint would require an inquiry into religious doctrine; the other allegations, including the retaliation and workers' comp claims, could well fall into the purview of secular employment law. It therefore refused to dismiss the rest of Maruani's case. Maruani v. AER Services, U.S. District Court, D. Minnesota, No. 06-176 (9/18/06).

Point to remember: The immunity of religious employers has been in the news lately; courts are very consistent in their refusal to hear claims that involve theology and religious doctrine.