involving statements made by pastors during a formal church disciplinary proceeding and stating that “on the facts before us—where ministers made largely religious and doctrinal allegations as part of an excommunication proceeding and only disseminated those statements to members of the congregation—’the First Amendment has struck the balance for us’”
How later courts described this case
- involving statements made by pastors during a formal church disciplinary proceeding and stating that “on the facts before us—where ministers made largely religious and doctrinal allegations as part of an excommunication proceeding and only disseminated those statements to members of the congregation—’the First Amendment has struck the balance for us’”
- holding that analyzing statements made during a church disciplinary proceeding would improperly interfere with a church decision regarding faith or mission
- observing that statements “cannot serve as the basis for a defamation claim” when “adjudicating the truth or falsity of the statements would require the court to consider and interpret matters of church doctrine”
- reversing course on previous holding and noting “Hosanna-Tabor leads us to conclude that the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine is not a jurisdictional bar”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
GILDEA, Chief Justice
(dissenting).
I join in the dissent of Justice Lillehaug.