The Volokh Conspiracy

Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent

About The Volokh Conspiracy Editorial Independence Who we are Books Volokh Daily Email Archives Search DMCA RSS

Civil Liberties

Should the Clergy-Penitent Privilege Be Abolished in Child Sexual Abuse Cases?

My new law review article defends long-standing principles: The privilege is not only constitutionally required, but it also helps to protect abuse victims by bringing sexual abuse to light.

Paul Cassell | 6.29.2026 9:00 AM

The clergy-penitent privilege has been recognized in American law for more than two hundred years and is now widely enshrined in law across the country. In a recent article in Law and Psychology Review, however, my law school colleague Amos Guiora and co-authors Diana Pogosyan and Matylda J. Blaszczak argue for carving out a significant exception to the privilege. Their article—"Sacred Secrets Enabling Child Sex Abuse"—claims that the privilege "enables" child sexual abuse by allowing clergy to "turn[] a blind eye" to abuse disclosed in a confession. They propose that, to protect children, clergy should be compelled by threat of criminal punishment to immediately call the police whenever a parishioner confesses child sexual abuse, even if doing so violates sincerely held religious belief.

In my response article in the same journal, I take on Sacred Secrets' arguments and defend the privilege. I argue that the privilege should apply in all cases—including those involving child sexual abuse. From my article's introduction:

Sacred Secrets fails to make a persuasive case for its extreme position. Its argument focuses on situations where an abuser has confessed to clergy under the protection of the privilege. But the article neglects to consider whether........

© Reason.com