Chun-Ko Chang v. Shen Yun Performing Arts, Inc., (SD NY, Aug. 18, 2026), is a class action suit brought by students who also are performers in a Chinese dance company based in New York. Plaintiffs allege violations of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act as well as New York's Labor Law. The court dismissed certain claims but allowed plaintiffs to move ahead with others. One defense raised but not accepted at this stage of the proceedings was the ministerial exception defense. According to the court:
Shen Yun identifies itself as a nonprofit dance company devoted to highlighting Chinese culture and morality while exposing the “cruelty of the Chinese Communist Party.” .... Shen Yun recruits children as students to work as dancers and musicians for Shen Yun (“Performers”), many of which are recruited from abroad.... From the start of their time at Shen Yun as students, many Performers are recruited to attend the Fei Tian Academy of the Arts or Fei Tian College, which Plaintiffs allege “operate[s] as a cover for the forced labor scheme.”... This alleged “forced labor scheme,” is used to achieve the overarching goal of the Shen Yun Defendants, i.e., “performing uncompensated or undercompensated labor as Performers in Shen Yun performances, so that Defendants may reap massive financial benefits.”...
Hongzhi Li founded and leads Falun Gong, which is a “practice that combines teachings for self-improvement and mediation exercises,” though he has asserted that Falung Gong is not a religion.... Rui Lee is Hongzhi Li’s wife, and together, the Lis are alleged to “effectively control Shen Yun’s considerable assets, and personally and secretly benefit from that control....”
SYZ Defendants argue that the ministerial exception applies to this matter and accordingly bars Plaintiffs’ claims in their entirety, as Plaintiffs are “ministers” of the “religious organization” of Shen Yun....
... Defendants attempt to argue that these “Performers” are “ministers” because that term “includes anyone who communicates a religious message on behalf of a faith-based organization.” ... However, the Court may not, at the motion to dismiss stage, engage in such a factual analysis where, as here, it is not clear from the four corners of the [complaint] that Plaintiffs “clearly” fall into the category of “ministers,” or for that matter, whether Shen Yun “clearly” qualifies as a “religious organization.”...
