Articles Discussing General Topics Regarding Religious Discrimination Claims Under Title VII Of The Civil Rights Act Of 1964.

Soap Operas are known for drama.  Nothing has caused more drama in the last two years than vaccine mandates.  Last week, a California court determined that a plaintiff’s request for religious accommodation at General Hospital could not be accommodated.  The court concluded defendant had advanced sufficient evidence that unvaccinated employees

During recent oral arguments, justices for the Supreme Court of the United States seemed conflicted on whether to upend the existing standard that allows an employer to refuse religious accommodations to its employees if the employer can show that granting the accommodation would involve more than a “de minimis” cost

On April 18, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Groff v. DeJoy, a case raising the issue of how great a burden an employer must bear in order to accommodate an employee’s religious belief or practices.

There has been a recent, dramatic rise in antisemitism in the United States. In this podcast, David Goldman, the Executive Director and General Counsel of Congregation Emanu-El in San Francisco, shares his perspective on how this trend is impacting our communities and workplaces, and offers some practical insights as

The U.S. Supreme Court is set to consider whether its own definition of “undue hardship” with respect to religious accommodation requests, which employers have relied upon for more than 45 years, remains valid when it hears oral argument in Groff v. DeJoy, No. 22-174.

It is no secret that antisemitism is on the rise throughout the United States. The Anti-Defamation League’s (ADL’s) 2021 Survey on Jewish Americans’ Experience with Antisemitism found that in the last five years, 63 percent of Jewish people either experienced or witnessed an antisemitic event.

Executive Summary: The recent Supreme Court decision in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, 142 S. Ct. 2407 (June 27, 2022), is the latest to promote free exercise of speech and religion over all other competing interests. In its June 27, 2022 opinion, the Court’s conservative majority held that the Free Exercise and Free Speech clauses of the First Amendment protect an individual engaging in personal religious observances from government reprisal, even when he does so on school property at a school-sponsored event. Kennedy held that a coach may pray at the 50-yard line after a high school football game. The decision strays from and overturns prior Supreme Court precedent established in Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971), adhering to the separation of church and state, one of the United States’ founding principles.

A school district infringed on an assistant football coach’s rights under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment when it suspended him for continuing to publicly pray after football games in violation of its policy, the U.S. Supreme Court has held. Kennedy v. Bremerton Sch. Dist., No. 21-418, 2022 U.S. LEXIS 3218 (June 27, 2022).

The U.S. Supreme Court has held in favor of a former high school football coach in western Washington who lost his job after kneeling to pray on the 50-yard line after games. Kennedy v. Bremerton School Dist., No. 21–418 (June 27, 2022).

In reversing the Ninth Circuit, the Court held

Recently, the 9th Circuit applied, in an unpublished opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court’s broad definition of minister for purposes of the “ministerial exception.” Under the ministerial exception, religious institutions have a First Amendment right “to decide for themselves, free from state interference, matters of church government as well as those

On July 9, 2021, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, sitting en banc, issued a 7-3 decision in the closely watched case Sandor Demkovich v. St Andrew the Apostle Parish, Calumet City and the Archdiocese of Chicago. The Seventh Circuit found that the ministerial exception acted as a per se bar to the plaintiff’s hostile work environment claims. 

The U.S. Supreme Court has found that Philadelphia’s ordinance requiring a private foster care agency to certify same-sex couples as foster parents burdened the agency’s religious exercise in violation of the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.

When it comes to striking a balance between the religious rights of government employees and the government’s duty to avoid Establishment Clause violations, “context matters.”

In Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, 991 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. 2021), the Ninth Circuit held that the public prayer by Joseph Kennedy, a football

Whether or not a religious belief is sincerely held by an applicant or employee is rarely at issue in most religious discrimination lawsuits. With both the EEOC and DFEH guidance requiring employers to accommodate an employee who has a sincerely held religious belief that prevents an employee from receiving any of the COVID-19 vaccinations, the issue of what is a “sincerely held religious belief” has become more important in employment law. This is particularly true for those employers that decide to mandate the COVID-19 vaccination as a condition of employment or condition of receiving certain employment benefits.

Note: Includes spoilers for OWN’s Greenleaf.

Based on praise from various friends and colleagues, the lovely Mrs. Reed and I recently began watching Greenleaf, a series on the Oprah Winfrey Network (OWN) that ran from 2016 to 2020. Wikipedia describes the show as follows:

Source: BD Images / shutterstock