On Thursday, June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court unanimously reversed the Wisconsin Supreme Court in a significant religious-freedom case—Catholic Charities Bureau, Inc., et al. v. Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission, et al. With First Amendment considerations at the forefront of the Court’s decision, the case has set an important precedent for the future of religious freedom in our nation.
Background
In 2016, the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development denied the Catholic Charities Bureau of Superior a requested religious exemption from participating in the state’s unemployment tax. Under Wis. Stat. § 108.02(15)(h)(2) all non-profits are exempt from state unemployment tax if they meet two criteria:
- The organization must be “operated for primarily religious purposes.”
- The organization must be “operated, supervised, controlled, or principally supported by a church or convention or association of churches.”
The Charity, which is a ministry branch of the Catholic Diocese of Superior, claimed that its work clearly fit within these criteria.
The organization filed an appeal which successfully reversed the decision rendered by a lower court ruling. However, the Labor and Industry Review Commission reversed that decision claiming that the Catholic Charities Bureau is not “operated for primarily religious purposes” as required in the Wisconsin Statute. The case eventually made its way to the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court
Last year, the Wisconsin Supreme Court heard the case, and all four liberal members, agreed with the lower court opining—and wrongly so in our opinion—that the activities Catholic Charities does are not religious in nature nor are they restricted to Catholics.
Conservative Justice Rebecca Grassl Bradley communicated strong disagreement in her dissenting opinion, expressing concern over her colleagues’ misinterpretation of the statute:
“The majority’s misinterpretation of the exemption renders the statute in violation of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution as well as the Wisconsin Constitution. By focusing on whether a nonprofit primarily engages in activities that are ‘religious in nature,’ the majority transforms a broad exemption into a denominational preference for Protestant religions and a discriminatory exclusion of Catholicism, Judaism, Islam, Sikhism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Hare Krishna, and the Church of Latter Day Saints, among others.”
Justice Bradley was joined in her dissent by Chief Justice Annette Ziegler, and Justice Brian Hagedorn dissented in part. Following the Wisconsin Supreme Court decision, the Catholic Charities Bureau appealed to the United States Supreme Court.
A Monumental Victory for Religious Freedom
In a victory for religious freedom and the First Amendment, the United States Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favor of the Catholic Charities Bureau of Superior.
The Court’s decision focuses on the question of denominational neutrality and concluded that in this instance, the state had violated that principle and that the Wisconsin Supreme Court was blatantly wrong in its decision. Liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor authored the unanimous opinion, in which she said,
“It is fundamental to our constitutional order that the government maintain ‘neutrality between religion and religion.’ Epperson, 393 U. S., at 104. There may be hard calls to make in policing that rule, but this is not one. When the government distinguishes among religions based on theological differences in their provision of services, it imposes a denominational preference that must satisfy the highest level of judicial scrutiny. Because Wisconsin has transgressed that principle without the tailoring necessary to survive such scrutiny, the judgment of the Wisconsin Supreme Court is reversed….” (Emphasis added.)
Even though they have very different judicial philosophies, Justice Sotomayor extolled Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Rebecca Bradley’s legal analysis of this case as written in Justice Bradley’s dissenting opinion.
US Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, writing a concurring opinion, dealt with another question Catholic Charities of Superior had raised—that of the right of the state to interfere with a religious entity’s internal structure and right of association, thus violating church autonomy:
“I would reverse for an additional reason—that the Wisconsin Supreme Court violated the church autonomy doctrine. However incorporated, Catholic Charities and its subentities are, from a religious perspective, a mere arm of the Diocese of Superior. The Wisconsin Supreme Court should have deferred to that understanding, and its failure to do so amounted to an unlawful attempt by the State to redefine the Diocese’s internal governance.”
Daniel Degner, president of Wisconsin Family Council, commented, “Whenever the government impedes religious autonomy for any religious entity, it opens the door for attacks on the churches and parachurch ministries we serve. We are proud to have been involved with this case from its inception and are extremely pleased with this United States Supreme Court decision.
We are grateful the court agreed that the Evers’ administration cannot unilaterally decide what constitutes religious activity for a particular religious entity. This decision is another important step in retaining religious freedom for all Wisconsinites.”
Working with Center for American Rights president and attorney Daniel Suhr, Wisconsin Family Council joined with Maranatha Baptist University, Maranatha Baptist Academy, and Wisconsin Association of Christian Schools in filing a friend-of-the-court (amicus) brief in this case as it went to the US Supreme Court.
The work of Wisconsin Family Action is possible because of generous friends who partner with us financially and in prayer. If you value the work WFA does, we invite you to invest in this unique work that is all about you, your family, your faith, your freedom, and your future! As always, we welcome and covet your prayers.
