A year ago (June 7, 2012), the House Judiciary Committee held an oversight hearing into the Department of Justice. Among the many questions asked of Attorney General Eric Holder was a series of questions-and criticisms-from Virginia Democrat Bobby Scott, probing into the Obama administration’s policies and practices concerning religious hiring by religious organizations that receive federal funds. AG Holder’s written answers to additional questions, including additional questions from Rep. Scott about religious hiring, were finally received by the committee earlier this month. Both questions and answers make for interesting reading.

Of the answers, the most interesting is a list the Attorney General offers of six faith-based organizations that in 2008 and 2009 utilized a procedure authorized by the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to be able to take part in programs operated by the Office of Justice Programs (Dept. of Justice), even though the organizations hire according to religion and those OJP programs include a ban on various forms of employment discrimination, including religious job discrimination. The Department of Justice itself set out in the previous administration how RFRA permits such action, and this administration has followed the law in the same way.

On the other hand, Rep. Scott’s questions betray a deep misunderstanding of the law and of faith-based organizations. For instance, he prefaces his questions by saying that earlier information from the Attorney General makes it clear that “notwithstanding federal statute[s] explicitly prohibiting discrimination based on religion, this Administration does in fact permit discrimination based on religion with federal funds.” And thus, “an employer using government money can tell a job applicant-the most qualified job applicant-we don’t hire your kind, even for a job paid for with taxpayer funds.”

Isn’t that something: asserting that the administration deliberately violates the law by giving federal funds to organizations that illegally consider religion when hiring staff. Surely, Rep. Scott, if blatant lawbreaking like this was happening, the ACLU, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and others would instantly be in court to call a halt to the nefarious practice. Since they aren’t rushing to court, perhaps what the religious organizations is doing isn’t actually illegal. Moreover, it is odd, to say the least, to think that, for a religious organization, religion is and should be irrelevant as a job qualification. That’s like imagining that political views are and ought to be irrelevant when Rep. Scott and his colleagues are selecting their own staff.

To be sure, the topic of religious hiring is complicated. But it isn’t this complicated and mysterious.