This work offers a comprehensive analysis of restrictions on clerical ministry imposed through non-penal administrative procedures, particularly focusing on the Essential Norms of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and the published jurisprudence of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura. To this end, the study critically explores the role of the principle of proportionality in the jurisprudence of the Apostolic Signatura, highlighting its central importance in determining the legality and legitimacy of non-penal disciplinary measures. These measures, typically applied in cases of problematic or illicit clerical behavior, must adhere to the principle of proportionality to maintain a just balance between the motivating cause and the restriction imposed, ensuring their validity and fairness. Examining the published jurisprudence of the Apostolic Signatura, the research shows how the principle of proportionality should be applied consistently to non-penal restrictions, ensuring that they are lawful and protective of individual rights within the Church. The study concludes by emphasizing the critical role of proportionality in guiding ecclesiastical authorities to impose non-penal measures that are reasonable and just while minimizing unnecessary harm to those affected. Regarding its content, the thesis begins by establishing a theoretical framework for non-penal disciplinary measures, using a comparative analysis with civil law to highlight distinctions and parallels between ecclesiastical and secular legal responses. It then proceeds to analyze the administrative acts underlying these restrictions, with particular attention to their use in response to clerical misconduct, especially in light of the sexual abuse crisis in the United States of America. The historical development of these measures is traced, showing how the Church has increasingly turned to non-penal solutions to address these crises.