In a decisive opinion, a panel of three Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals justices—all Democrat-appointed—overturned a lower court’s ruling, thereby restoring World Vision’s right to control the conduct of its employees. Center Director Steve McFarland noted for the San Francisco Chronicle that the result confirms “the commonsense idea that religious ministries can expect their staff to live what they say they believe.”
In 2023, Plaintiff Aubry McMahon applied for a position with World Vision, a large Christian international relief and development nonprofit. During the interview, Ms. McMahon affirmed World Vision’s statement of faith and her ability to abide by its code of conduct, the latter reflecting its view of traditional marriage. After World Vision offered her the position, McMahon revealed that she was in a same-sex marriage. World Vision withdrew the offer, and McMahon sued asserting a Title VII violation.
The Ninth Circuit’s opinion, resting on the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2012 Hosana-Tabor decision, noted that because one of the duties of the position was to pray with donors, it qualified as “a form of ministry.” The Center filed an amicus brief on behalf of a broad coalition. CLS Center director Steve McFarland initially led the legal team’s response at World Vision in his previous role as their chief legal officer.
The trial court originally dismissed McMahon’s claims for violating the First Amendment’s church autonomy doctrine, but it granted McMahon’s motion for reconsideration on the grounds that McMahon admitted that she wasn’t making a pretext claim (correct) and that the church autonomy doctrine only bars pretext claims (incorrect). In late November, the trial judge granted McMahon partial summary judgment, rejecting World Vision’s defenses under the ministerial exception, Title VII’s religious exemption, and the First Amendment protections for religious exercise, speech, and association. World Vision then appealed to the Ninth Circuit, which remanded the case and ordered the trial court to reverse its decision and enter a decision in favor of World Vision.
