Religious Rights in the Workplace: Navigating the Minefield of Antidiscrimination Law and Religious Protection

Description

In Braidwood Management v. the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (2023), the Fifth Circuit held that a private business with sincere religious beliefs against gender-nonconforming conduct is exempt from Title VII where the employer required employees to wear clothes conforming to their biological gender. The court found that despite Title VII's prohibition of discrimination based on sexual orientation, prohibiting such discrimination is not a sufficiently compelling interest to override religious freedom in all cases.

However, in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. R. G. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. (2018), the Sixth Circuit came to the opposite conclusion, holding that gender identity discrimination is a per se form of sex discrimination prohibited by Title VII and dismissing the employer's religious belief that continuing to employ a transgender employee would have amounted to an endorsement of the employee's decision to transition. These cases have created a circuit split and demonstrate the growing tension between employer and employee rights to religious freedom and freedom from discrimination.

Adding to this tension are First Amendment concerns. In 303 Creative L.L.C. v. Elenis (2023), the U.S. Supreme Court held that forcing a graphic designer to create wedding websites for same-sex couples in compliance with Colorado's antidiscrimination law would have violated her First Amendment rights. This case has employment implications where workers may be emboldened to assert First Amendment objections to antidiscrimination laws and workplace policies where these infringe on their religious beliefs.

Listen as our expert panel addresses the growing tension between Title VII and RFRA as well as First Amendment considerations and the issues these cause for employers. The panel will also provide best practices for employers to navigate their legal obligations and minimize risk.