Salem College & Academy, Inc. v. Employment Div.
Citation | 298 Or. 471,695 P.2d 25 |
Decision Date | 02 April 1985 |
Docket Number | T-56 |
Parties | , 53 USLW 2388, 23 Ed. Law Rep. 287 SALEM COLLEGE & ACADEMY, INC., Respondent on Review, v. EMPLOYMENT DIVISION, Raymond P. Thorne, Assistant Director For Employment, Petitioner on Review. SC 29528; CA A20465; ED 80- |
Court | Supreme Court of Oregon |
James E. Mountain, Jr., Sol. Gen., Salem, argued the cause and filed a brief for petitioner on review. With him on the petition were Dave Frohnmayer, Atty. Gen., Stanton F. Long, William F. Gary, Deputy Attys. Gen., and Jan Peter Londahl, Asst. Atty. Gen., Salem.
Paul M. Fletcher, Salem, argued the cause and filed a brief for respondent on review.
Leslie M. Roberts, Portland, filed an amicus curiae brief for American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Oregon, Inc. With her on the brief were Rex Armstrong and Charles F. Hinkle, Portland.
Oregon's unemployment compensation law, ORS chapter 657, excludes from covered "employment" services performed for certain religious organizations, thus exempting such organizations from taxation to support unemployment benefits. The statutory formula for the exclusion, ORS 657.072(1), deliberately mirrors the corresponding formula of the Federal Unemployment Tax Act, 26 U.S.C. § 3309(b)(1) (1982), so as to maintain the coverage required to protect the federal tax credits and federal grants on which the national unemployment compensation system is built. On petition by Salem College & Academy to review defendant's assessment of unemployment taxes against it, the Court of Appeals held the state and federal formula unconstitutional as an establishment of religion forbidden by the First Amendment insofar as the formula discriminates between a religious school affiliated with and one independent of a church or association of churches. Salem College & Academy, Inc. v. Emp. Div., 61 Or.App. 616, 659 P.2d 415 (1983). We allowed review to examine whether this constitutional holding was necessary and correct. We reverse the Court of Appeals.
Both the statutory scheme and the administrative proceedings and findings in this case are comprehensively set out in the opinion of the Court of Appeals. In summary, Congress originally exempted charitable, educational, and other tax-exempt organizations from federal unemployment compensation taxes and from obligatory coverage under state unemployment compensation laws. Coverage later was expanded until the present version, enacted in 1976, excludes (apart from ministers and members of religious orders) only employment by a church or convention or association of churches, or by "an organization which is operated primarily for religious purposes and which is operated, supervised, controlled, or principally supported by a church or convention or association of churches." 26 U.S.C. § 3309(b)(1). Accordingly, the Legislative Assembly in 1977 amended ORS 657.072, the exemption for nonprofit employers. Previously this section had expressly excluded from coverage services performed "(c) In the employ of a school which is not an institution of higher education." After the amendments to conform to changes in FUTA, ORS 657.072(1)(a) provides:
Or.Laws 1977, ch. 446, § 4. The intended significance of repealing the previous express exclusion of schools is important in interpreting the present law.
In resisting the imposition of liability for unemployment compensation paid to four of its former employees, petitioner Salem College & Academy, Inc., (hereafter the Academy) claimed that it qualified either as a church or as "principally supported" by churches within ORS 657.072(1)(a), and that otherwise the imposition of coverage on it would violate a number of state and federal constitutional guarantees. After a hearing, the Employment Division rejected these contentions and affirmed the tax assessment.
The Court of Appeals described the Academy as follows:
61 Or.App. at 618, 659 P.2d at 417.
The referee concluded that the Academy is not itself a "church" nor principally supported by a "church or convention or association of churches" as those terms are used in the law. The Court of Appeals held that these administrative determinations were not erroneous, and that it therefore had to consider the constitutionality of the distinction between religious schools like the Academy and otherwise identical religious schools like the Academy and otherwise identical regligious schools closely affiliated with one or more churches. Id. at 625, 659 P.2d at 420.
We begin by outlining the complex structure of the problem before us. The complexity arises from the relation between state and federal law before reaching a question of the relation between church and state.
Seen from the national perspective, the Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA), 26 U.S.C. §§ 3301 to 3311 (1982), is a tax law, as its name indicates. The Congress that enacted it in 1935 did not undertake to create a nationally administered unemployment compensation system. Whether by reason of constitutional misgivings, 1 tradition, or policy, the choice was to leave unemployment insurance programs to the states, but to impel them to adopt adequate programs whose costs individual states were reluctant to impose on their domestic enterprises for fear of placing them at a competitive disadvantage. The chosen device was a federal payroll tax on employers, 90 percent of which could be offset by any payments a state might exact for a state unemployment compensation program that met prescribed federal standards.
FUTA did not and does not purport to command states to maintain unemployment compensation programs; it relies on the incentive not to expose the state's employers to a federal payroll tax without the credit allowed for a state tax. Nor does FUTA prevent a state from extending the coverage of its unemployment insurance laws beyond federal requirements. Compliance of a state's program with the standards stated in FUTA and interpreted and administered by the United States Department of Labor therefore is not commanded by the Supremacy Clause; 2 constitutionally, compliance is voluntary on the part of the state, though not practically or politically so. FUTA addresses taxpayers, not state legislatures. This view of the scheme was sustained in Steward Machine Co....
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Cooper v. Eugene School Dist. No. 4J
...to those reached by the United States Supreme Court. See, e.g., Smith v. Employment Division, supra; Salem College & Academy, Inc. v. Employment Division, 298 Or. 471, 695 P.2d 25 (1985); Dickman v. School Dist. 62C, 232 Or. 238, 366 P.2d 533 (1961), cert. den. 371 U.S. 823, 83 S.Ct. 41, 9 ......
-
State v. DeLaBruere
...(1989); Cooper v. Eugene School Dist. No. 4J, 301 Or. 358, 368-73, 723 P.2d 298, 305-08 (1986); Salem College & Academy, Inc. v. Employment Div., 298 Or. 471, 484-92, 695 P.2d 25, 34-39 (1985). In none of these cases did the court hold that the Oregon constitutional provisions afforded grea......
-
State v. Savastano
...an exemption for sailors that advanced only that legislative objective. Id. at 410, 28 P. 130.8 In Salem College & Academy, Inc. v. Emp. Div., 298 Or. 471, 488 n. 13, 695 P.2d 25 (1985), this court explained that the phrase "privileges, or immunities" in Article I, section 20, is not limite......
-
Linder v. Linder
...not have the power to edit statutes so as to add requirements that the legislature did not include."); Salem College & Academy, Inc. v. Employment Div., 298 Or. 471, 695 P.2d 25 (1985). There is one final point. Justice Kennedy observed in Troxel that "a domestic relations proceeding in and......
-
Chapter §2.2 ARTICLE I, SECTIONS 2 AND 3: FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE AND RELIGIOUS OPINION
...(1958) (upholding zoning ordinance that barred church from residential area). In Salem Coll. & Acad., Inc. v. Employment Div., 298 Or 471, 695 P2d 25 (1985), the court changed course. The case involved a challenge to the application of the Unemployment Compensation Act to religious schools.......
-
Chapter § 2.2
...a zoning ordinance that barred churches from residential areas). In Salem College & Academy, Inc. v. Employment Division, 298 Or 471, 695 P2d 25 (1985), the court changed course. The case involved a challenge to the application of Oregon's Unemployment Compensation Act to religious schools.......