## Facts

- Jerrold S. Pime, a Jewish part-time philosophy lecturer, sought a full-time, tenure-track position at Loyola University of Chicago, a Jesuit Catholic university.
- Loyola’s Philosophy Department adopted a resolution reserving the next three tenure-track vacancies for Jesuits to maintain an “adequate Jesuit presence” in the department.
- Pime was told there was no foreseeable tenure-track opportunity for him because those positions were reserved for Jesuits.
- After leaving Loyola, Pime filed a Title VII religious-discrimination charge and then sued under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a).
- Loyola asserted affirmative defenses under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(e): (1) a religious educational-institution exception under § 2000e-2(e)(2) and (2) a religion BFOQ under § 2000e-2(e)(1).
- After a bench trial, the district court rejected § 2000e-2(e)(2) but held Loyola proved a BFOQ under § 2000e-2(e)(1) and entered judgment for Loyola.

## Issues

1. Whether reserving the next three tenure-track philosophy positions for Jesuits constituted unlawful religious discrimination under Title VII.
2. Whether Loyola proved that being a Jesuit was a bona fide occupational qualification reasonably necessary to the normal operation of the university for those positions under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(e)(1).
3. Whether Loyola independently qualified for the religious educational-institution exception under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(e)(2).

## Decision

- The Seventh Circuit affirmed the judgment for Loyola.
- The court held that, for the specific vacancies at issue, Loyola established that being a Jesuit could be a BFOQ under § 2000e-2(e)(1).
- Because the BFOQ defense sustained the judgment, the court did not resolve the correctness of the district court’s rejection of Loyola’s § 2000e-2(e)(2) defense and left that ruling undisturbed.

## Legal Principles

- Title VII’s BFOQ exception for religion under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(e)(1) is narrowly construed, but it permits religion-based hiring when reasonably necessary to the normal operation of the employer’s enterprise.
- A religiously affiliated university may treat preservation of its religious character and mission as part of its “normal operation,” supporting a religion-based qualification for certain positions when tightly connected to that mission.
- The validity of a religion BFOQ may depend on the limited, targeted scope of the requirement (here, a fixed number of positions in a single department rather than a university-wide exclusion).
- A policy excluding all nonmembers of a religious order from specified positions is analyzed as a categorical qualification tied to institutional mission, not as discrimination against a particular nonpreferred faith.

## Conclusion

The court upheld Loyola’s reservation of three tenure-track philosophy positions for Jesuits because the university showed that a meaningful Jesuit presence in that department was reasonably necessary to its Jesuit identity and educational mission, satisfying Title VII’s narrow religion BFOQ exception.


Pime v. Loyola Univ. of Chi., 803 F.2d 351 (7th Cir. 1986)