midnight club 3 dub edition game. See Z.A.V. v. Tocci, supra, 87 N.J. at 501, 516 A.2d 14.
The Court in Z.A.V. was quite explicit about the issues that were to be addressed by the Legislature in enacting the Law Against Discrimination. The Court wrote:
[T]he Legislature should be specifically addressing the question whether and how the grant of immunity to religious organizations might affect civil liberties. Our attention to this broad issue is especially important in light of the remedial character of the Law Against Discrimination. [Id. at 506, 517 A.2d 441.]
In this State, we have never had occasion to address whether a religious institution enjoys immunity from the Law Against Discrimination. But our case law does address the issue of governmental immunity from actions seeking equitable relief. In Federico v. Rural New Jersey Milk Marketing Ass'n, supra, 68 N.J. at 193, 344 A.2d 841, for example, we held that the State and its instrumentalities are immune from equitable actions, but concluded that when an action is strictly legal in nature, the State and its instrumentalities *150 may be held liable. Id. at 193-94, 344 A.2d 8 0b46394aab